Mailshake vs QuickMail
 Mailshake |  QuickMail | |
|---|---|---|
| Sentiment | ||
| Score | 19/100 | 56/100 |
| Rank in category | #11 | #1 |
| Rated comments | 9 | 14 |
| Best for | Beginners who want a simple, affordable email sequencer | Small teams and agencies sending at low to moderate volume that want a simple, flat-priced sequencer; Senders whose prospects are mostly on Gmail or Google Workspace |
| Skip it if | Senders who rely on the built-in warmup to fix inbox placement | Lists heavy on Outlook or Microsoft 365 addresses, unless deliverability is tested first; High-volume senders who need advanced features or a dependable campaign API |
| Starting price | $25/mo | $49/mo |
| Pricing (vendor-stated) | Per-user plans: Starter $25/mo billed annually ($29 monthly), Email Outreach $45/mo annually ($49 monthly), Sales Engagement $85/mo annually ($99 monthly); Agency plan via sales; Data Finder and ready-made mailboxes are paid add-ons; no free trial (payment up front) and no free plan. | Starter $49/mo (5,000 emails and 1,000 uploaded contacts a month), Growth $99/mo (100,000 emails, 25,000 contacts, API), Agency $299/mo (500,000 emails, 100,000 contacts, two workspaces); all plans include unlimited users, inboxes and LinkedIn accounts plus free warmup. Monthly prices; no annual discount listed. 14-day free trial with card required and no auto-charge; no free plan. |
Independent discussion is thin: about nine non-promotional comments give a real view, most of them brief. Users who rate it describe Mailshake as a straightforward, reasonably priced sender that is fine for beginners, while several commenters blame its small warmup pool and shared sending infrastructure when emails land in spam, and older reports found it did nothing extra for deliverability. Over 40 of the 100 comments were promotional, mostly accounts dropping Mailshake into lists to plug other products, including a cluster pushing Klenty with near-identical wording.
Users like
Users complain about
- Warmup pool is seen as small, and one user's inbox placement rose from about 40% to 75% after moving to Instantly[1][2]
- Shared sending infrastructure means your reputation depends on other customers' sending[1]
- Seen as a plain sending tool that did nothing extra for deliverability (2020 report)[1]
- A link-building user got much better results after switching to lemlist's personalized images (2021)[1]
Independent discussion is modest and mostly brief: about 14 non-promotional comments carry an opinion, and about 40% of all mentions are promotional, including a cluster of near-identical posts using QuickMail threads to plug Mystrika and repeated plugs for Pulse for Reddit, emailbison and other tools. Users who stay on QuickMail describe it as affordable, simple and consistent for low to moderate volume, and one agency reports 15-30% reply rates with it. The recurring weak spot is Outlook: one user says 90% of Outlook sends failed, and a header test found QuickMail-specific markers on Outlook sends that Gmail sends did not carry; others call it too basic for high volume.
Users like
- Users describe it as affordable, and one agency says it keeps costs minimal and sells Google Workspace inboxes cheaply[1][2][3]
- Simple, smooth workflow for basic sequencing[1][2]
- Some long-time users say sending has stayed consistent, with one agency reporting 15-30% reply rates on well-segmented lists[1][2]
- A header test found Gmail sends in stealth mode carried no QuickMail fingerprint and looked like a native Gmail send[1]
Users complain about
- Outlook is the weak spot: one user says about 90% of sends to Outlook addresses failed, and a header test found a QuickMail-specific Message-ID and hidden tracking markup on Outlook sends even with tracking turned off[1][2]
- One user reports struggling for replies, with about half of their emails landing in spam according to MailFlow[1]
- Described as fine for basic sending but too limited once you need to scale volume[1]