Three platforms can pay this site. Five cannot.

Seven platforms are compared on this site. Three of them can pay Reorderly and four cannot, including the two largest names in the category — and nor can Drip, which is named in passing but not compared. This page lists every one, because a comparison where the reader cannot see the incentive is not much of a comparison.

The three that can pay

Omnisend, Sender and Moosend each run an open publisher programme. Links to them on this site begin with /go/ and carry rel="sponsored nofollow", so both you and a search engine can tell them apart from ordinary editorial links at a glance. Follow one, subscribe to a paid plan, and the platform pays Reorderly a share of what you pay it. Your price is the platform's price; this site cannot alter it and has no code that would.

All three pay recurring rather than one-off commissions, which is worth knowing because it shapes the incentive: this site earns more from a reader who stays subscribed than from one who signs up and leaves within a month. That happens to point in the same direction as recommending software somebody does not regret, which is the only reason the arrangement is tolerable.

Until each programme approves this specific domain, those /go/ addresses land on the vendor's own homepage and earn nothing at all. Every page on this site is written to read correctly in that state, because that is the state it launches in.

The five that pay nothing

These get covered, compared, and recommended where they are the right answer. None of them is linked through /go/, none carries a sponsored tag, and none ever will.

• Klaviyo. The biggest name in store email, and it runs partner programmes for agencies and technology vendors rather than for publishers. There is nothing here to sell. It is described as the most capable platform in the comparison because that is what its published feature set supports, and it earns this site nothing for the compliment.
• Mailchimp. No in-house publisher programme exists. A network offer does; this site does not take it, and its prices are quoted from its own page with the date they were read.
• Brevo. Its programme does not accept sites without existing traffic, so no paid relationship exists — and a link will not be marked sponsored here to imply one that does not. Brevo is recommended by name for large lists mailed occasionally, where it genuinely wins.
• Shopify Email. Out of scope as a partner and treated purely as a price: 10,000 emails a month free, then $1 per 1,000. For a Shopify store it is frequently the cheapest answer on the page, and saying so costs this site a sale.
• Drip. Its affiliate terms could not be read at the source, so it is named in prose where relevant and linked nowhere. A programme this site has not verified does not get a link.

The rules this site holds itself to

• No discount codes, promo boxes or "exclusive deal" language, anywhere, on any page. Several of these programmes forbid it outright and this site would not run them regardless. Where a vendor publishes its own annual-billing saving, it is quoted as that vendor's published price with the date.
• No paid search on any platform's brand name, and no vendor trademark in this site's name or domain.
• No partner link inside a numbered instruction. If a page is telling you how to do something, the instruction is not also a sales pitch.
• Order comes from published figures. The comparison tables on this site are ordered by price, cheapest first, which repeatedly puts platforms that pay nothing above platforms that do.
• Platforms that pay nothing appear in the same tables, with the same detail, as platforms that pay.

What a refusal looks like here

Klaviyo is the clearest one. It is the single most searched platform in this category, this site would earn a great deal from keying it, and it cannot be keyed because no publisher programme exists. So it gets a full review, a head-to-head, a pricing breakdown and an honest description of what it is better at than anything else here — all of it unpaid.

Brevo is the second. Its programme rejects new sites, so rather than omit a platform that genuinely suits a large, rarely-mailed list, it is covered and linked plainly.

If a programme ever required this site to soften a limitation, bury a fee or drop a competitor, the link would come out and the reason would be written on this page. Something published in this much detail cannot be reversed without the reversal being visible.

If you would rather not

Nothing on this site depends on your using a marked link. Every platform here can be reached by typing its name into a search engine, and the comparison works identically either way — which is the point of dating every figure and naming the page it came from. You can check the whole thing without going through anybody.