/ Compare — Mailjet
The send is French. The stack belongs to someone else.
Mailjet is a French, EU-hosted platform with a genuinely good collaborative editor — and a chain of ownership behind it. The sending runs on its sister company Mailgun's infrastructure, the product sits inside the Sinch group, and its roadmap moves at a parent's pace. EDP is the other shape: an independent specialist on its own PowerMTA and KumoMTA, dedicated IPs you own, reputation work as the core service — also under EU jurisdiction. Both are European, so this is not a sovereignty argument. It is about who owns the stack your mail runs on.
/ The honest answer
Mailjet is a French, EU-hosted email platform whose standout feature is real-time collaborative editing — but it is a portfolio product inside the Sinch group, its sending reportedly runs on sibling company Mailgun's infrastructure, and it uses shared IPs below its higher tiers. EDP is an independent specialist: its own PowerMTA and KumoMTA, dedicated IPs you own, reputation operations as the core service. Both run under EU jurisdiction, so sovereignty is not the dividing line — ownership of the infrastructure is. If you want collaborative campaign design, Mailjet earns it; if you want the company you talk to to own the stack your mail runs on, the independent specialist wins.
Both EU
Mailjet is French, its parent Sinch is Swedish — both inside the EU. Jurisdiction isn't the axis.
Sinch-owned
A portfolio product whose roadmap reviewers say slowed after the acquisition.
Sibling's infra
Mailjet's sending is reported to run on Mailgun's stack, its sibling under Sinch.
Own-infra
EDP runs its own PowerMTA & KumoMTA, dedicated IPs you own, reputation it controls.
/ 01 — Credit where it's due
Mailjet does one thing almost no rival does, and it does it well.
Its collaborative editor lets several people work on the same email template at once — live cursors, inline comments, version history, section locking — the way a shared document works, applied to email. For a team that currently passes drafts around over Slack and shared folders, that alone changes how campaigns get built, and at Mailjet's price it is unusually generous. Around it sits a sensible package: marketing and transactional email in one account, a clean REST API, a usable free tier of roughly six thousand emails a month, EU data processing with a proper DPA, and pricing by volume rather than by stored contacts, which suits big lists mailed infrequently. Founded in Paris in 2010 and serving more than a hundred thousand customers, it has earned its place as a practical middle ground.
So this page is not an argument that Mailjet is a weak product. On the marketing and collaboration side it is a strong one, and if that side is what you need, the rest of this comparison will not change your mind — nor should it. The argument here is narrower, and it is about a single thing the dashboard never shows you: whose infrastructure your mail actually runs on, and who decides where the product goes next.
/ 02 — Two chains of ownership
Follow each send upward. One chain is long and ends at a parent; the other is short and ends with us.
Ownership and infrastructure relationships reflect independent 2026 profiles of Mailjet and the Sinch group. Both chains stay inside the EU; the difference is their length and where they end.
/ 03 — The chain behind the send
Who is actually behind the mail you send?
Pick a provider and trace each send upward, one owner at a time. Both end inside the EU — but watch how far the chain runs, and who is standing at the top of it.
What the chain tells you
/ 04 — What owning the stack buys
Independence isn't a slogan. It changes three concrete things.
The first is the roadmap. When a sending product is one line in a large communications group's portfolio, its direction competes for attention with everything else the parent sells, and the reviews that describe Mailjet as maintaining rather than advancing since the acquisition are describing exactly that gravity. An independent specialist has only one product to improve, so the things that matter to senders — engine tuning, deliverability tooling, the operations around reputation — are the whole roadmap rather than a slice of it. You are not waiting in a queue behind SMS and voice and a dozen other group priorities.
The second is the infrastructure itself. Running mail across a sibling company's stack means the engine, the IP pools, and the tuning are operated by a team a step removed from the brand you chose, and shared by default until you climb the tiers. EDP runs its own PowerMTA and KumoMTA, so the configuration is built around your traffic, your dedicated IPs are owned rather than borrowed, and the reputation on them is yours to keep — no neighbour on a shared pool can spend it, and no separate team owns the layer your deliverability depends on.
The third is accountability. When something goes wrong on a portfolio product running on a sibling's infrastructure, the brand, the stack, and the parent are three different parties, and the path to a fix runs across all of them — which is part of why reviewers note that lower-tier Mailjet support leans on documentation rather than people. With an independent specialist, the company you signed up with is the company that runs the engine and answers the phone. There is no upstream to escalate to, because there is no upstream — and for mail that has to reach the inbox, a short line of accountability is worth more than a long one.
/ 05 — The deliverability picture, in detail
A shared pool is fine until it isn't — and you don't pick the moment.
Independent testing in 2026 puts Mailjet's inbox placement in the mid-eighties percent, which is respectable for clean, opted-in lists and reflects mature underlying infrastructure. The number is not the concern. The structure behind it is: on the lower tiers your mail goes out from a shared IP pool, which means your sender reputation is partly collective. Your placement rises and falls not only with your own list hygiene but with the behaviour of every other sender on the same addresses — and reviewers repeatedly single out Gmail's Promotions tab as where that collective reputation shows up first.
That is a structural property, not a bug to be patched. On a shared pool you cannot fully isolate your reputation from your neighbours, because the IP that mailbox providers judge is shared by design. A single careless sender or a burst of complaints in the pool can move your placement in a week you did nothing wrong, and the lever to fix it — a dedicated IP — sits on Mailjet's Premium tier, gated behind a volume threshold around a hundred thousand sends a month. Until you reach it, the variable that decides whether your mail lands is partly out of your hands.
EDP inverts that from the entry point. Your IPs are dedicated and owned, so the reputation on them is built only by your mail and kept only by you — no neighbour to spend it. Warming runs on a per-ISP curve, because Gmail, Microsoft, Yahoo, and Apple each extend trust on their own terms and a flat schedule wastes the difference. And the work that holds placement steady after the first send — blocklist watching, feedback-loop processing, postmaster signals, a human response to a dip before it spreads — is operated for you as the core service rather than handed back as a set of tools. The variable Mailjet leaves partly collective becomes one you control outright.
/ 06 — When Mailjet is the right call
Plenty of teams should stay on Mailjet. Here's when.
The ownership chain only matters if your mail is the kind that lives or dies on the inbox. For a great many teams it is not, and Mailjet is the better, cheaper answer — moving to an independent sending specialist would strip away the exact features they rely on.
Stay with Mailjet when its strengths are your needs. Your team designs campaigns together and the real-time collaborative editor genuinely speeds that up — there is little like it at the price. You want marketing and transactional email in one EU-based account with one login. Your list is large but you mail it occasionally, where volume-based pricing beats contact-based rivals. Your sending is ordinary, opted-in marketing to engaged subscribers, where a shared pool in the mid-eighties for placement is perfectly fine. In each of those, the collaboration and the all-in-one console are the value, and a sending specialist would simply remove tools you use every week.
EDP earns the switch at a narrower moment: when the sending itself becomes the thing that has to be right. High transactional volume where a delayed message costs a signup; deliverability that maps to revenue closely enough that a shared pool's variance is a real cost; a need to own your IP reputation outright; or a preference, at scale, for the company you talk to be the one that runs the engine and owns the roadmap. Below that line, the chain behind the send is trivia. Above it, it is the whole point.
/ 07 — Side by side
Honest in both directions.
Mailjet wins collaboration, the all-in-one console, and the free tier — those are real and they are not ours. EDP wins owned infrastructure, independence, and the operations around deliverability. On jurisdiction the two are on the same side of the EU. Filter by what you care about.
/ 08 — Questions
Before you move the sending.
Both Mailjet and EDP are in the EU — what's the real difference?
Jurisdiction is the same on both sides, so it is not the dividing line. Mailjet is a French company founded in Paris in 2010, processing data in EU data centres; its parent, Sinch, is Swedish — both inside the EU. The difference is ownership and independence. Mailjet is a portfolio product within the Sinch group, and independent reviews note its transactional sending leans on the infrastructure of Mailgun, its sibling under the same parent. EDP is an independent company running its own PowerMTA and KumoMTA, with dedicated IPs you own and a roadmap set by no one upstream. You are choosing between a European brand inside a conglomerate and a European specialist that owns its own stack.
Does Mailjet really run on Mailgun's infrastructure?
That is how independent profiles of the platform describe it: Mailjet and Mailgun became sibling products after Sinch acquired the group, and Mailjet's transactional sending is reported to draw on Mailgun's delivery infrastructure rather than a stack Mailjet owns outright. None of that makes Mailjet unreliable — Mailgun's infrastructure is capable. The point is narrower: when you send through Mailjet, the brand on your dashboard and the infrastructure carrying your mail are not the same company, and both answer to a third. EDP collapses that into one — the company you talk to is the company that runs the engine your mail goes out on.
Why does the Sinch ownership matter if it's still in the EU?
Not for sovereignty — Sweden is in the EU, so the jurisdiction story is clean. It matters for two other reasons. First, roadmap: when a product becomes one item in a large communications group's portfolio, its direction is set by the parent's priorities, and several 2026 reviews observe that Mailjet's development has slowed since the acquisition, reading more as maintenance than active investment. Second, control of the stack: your sending lives on a sibling's infrastructure inside that group, so the people improving and operating it are a step removed from the brand you chose. EDP keeps the brand, the infrastructure, and the roadmap in one place — its own.
What does EDP do that Mailjet doesn't?
It owns the layer your mail runs on. EDP operates its own PowerMTA and KumoMTA rather than sending across a sibling company's stack, gives you dedicated IPs you own from the entry point rather than shared pools until you reach the higher tiers, and treats the work after the send — per-ISP warming, blocklist and feedback-loop monitoring, postmaster signals, response to a reputation dip — as the core product rather than a setting. And because EDP is independent, the roadmap answers to its customers, not to a parent balancing a portfolio. That is the difference between renting space in someone else's infrastructure and standing on your own.
What does Mailjet do that EDP doesn't?
Quite a bit on the workflow side, and pretending otherwise would be dishonest. Mailjet's signature feature is real-time collaborative editing — multiple people working on the same email template at once, with comments and version history, the way a shared document works — and it is genuinely useful and rare at its price. It combines marketing and transactional email in one account, offers a usable free tier of around 6,000 emails a month, and gives non-technical marketers a drag-and-drop editor. EDP builds none of that. If collaborative campaign design or an all-in-one marketing-plus-transactional console is what you need, Mailjet is the better tool and you should keep it.
Can I keep Mailjet for campaigns and use EDP for the sending?
Yes, and it is often the cleaner setup than a full switch. Keep Mailjet where it shines — collaborative template design, marketing campaigns, the unified console your team already knows — and route your transactional or high-volume sending through EDP, where it runs on independent, owned infrastructure with dedicated IPs and reputation operations. The marketing workflow stays put; the sending that has to reach the inbox at scale moves onto a stack built and owned for exactly that. The two address different problems, so running both is a sensible architecture rather than a compromise.
Is Mailjet's deliverability bad?
No — middle-of-the-pack is the fairer description, not bad. Independent testing in 2026 has put Mailjet's inbox placement around the mid-eighties percent, respectable for clean lists, and its transactional path benefits from mature underlying infrastructure. The qualifier reviewers keep adding is the shared IP pool on lower tiers: your reputation is partly collective, so placement varies with the senders around you, and Gmail's Promotions tab is a common friction point. EDP's answer is structural rather than a tuning tip — dedicated IPs you own, warmed per ISP, with reputation operations running continuously, so the variable that Mailjet leaves partly shared is one you control outright.
Mailjet offers dedicated IPs too — isn't that the same thing?
It offers them, but framed as an upgrade rather than the foundation. On Mailjet a dedicated IP appears on the Premium tier for senders above roughly 100,000 emails a month, sitting on top of the group's shared infrastructure. On EDP a dedicated IP you own is the starting point, on infrastructure EDP runs itself, with the operations around it — per-ISP warming, blocklist and feedback-loop work, postmaster monitoring — forming the actual service rather than an add-on. Same phrase, dedicated IP; one is a higher-plan feature on a sibling's stack, the other is the ground floor of an independent specialist.
How hard is it to move the sending off Mailjet?
It is a one-end change, which is what keeps it low-risk. Your marketing and collaborative editing stay exactly where they are on Mailjet; nothing about how your team designs campaigns moves. The only thing that changes is the production sending credential — the SMTP host and authentication, or the API key, that your application uses to send transactional and high-volume mail. You repoint that at EDP, we provision and warm dedicated IPs for you, and production traffic shifts over on a gradual curve rather than a hard cutover, so reputation builds cleanly instead of spiking. Because the marketing side and the sending side were always separate, moving one never forces a change to the other, and a rollback is simply repointing the credential back.
Keep the collaboration. Move the sending onto a stack you can name.
If Mailjet's editor runs your campaigns, leave it there. When your transactional or high-volume sending is the part that has to reach the inbox, point it at EDP — independent infrastructure, dedicated PowerMTA and KumoMTA on IPs you own, warmed and monitored, under EU jurisdiction. Tell us your volume and we'll size it.
Book infrastructure reviewRelated capabilities