Quick vs Deep Verification

Choose the mode based on how much uncertainty is in the list, not on a promise that any tool can guarantee delivery. Quick is the practical default. Deep adds evidence for a list that is older, more valuable or less familiar.

At a glance

The dashboard shows the exact credit total before you start. A Deep job charges 1 credit for addresses at providers where an additional mailbox probe is intentionally skipped, because those providers do not offer a useful per-address answer through that method.

What both modes examine

Both modes start with the checks that matter most for basic list quality:

• Is the address written in a usable form?
• Can the domain receive mail through usable MX records?
• Is the domain disposable or blocked?
• Has this address previously been suppressed for this TrekMail account?
• Do the address and domain show signals that call for care, such as a likely typo, a random-looking local part, weak DNS authentication or reputation information?

The results page shows the individual checks recorded for each address. A skipped or unavailable check is not the same as a pass or a failure.

What Deep adds

Deep adds extra risk analysis and can request additional mailbox-level evidence from a recipient mail system. This can be helpful with some business domains, but the remote system controls the answer. It may reject the check, accept every address, defer a response or provide no useful verdict.

Large mailbox providers commonly fall into the last group. For those addresses, Deep retains the core analysis and uses the 1-credit price shown in the estimate. Do not interpret a provider's response as confirmation of consent, ownership or guaranteed inbox delivery.

How to read Deep information

When to choose Quick

Use Quick when you are:

• refreshing a list that has already been cleaned;
• reviewing contacts collected through your own forms or customer process;
• checking a large list where the goal is to remove obvious errors and duplicates before a normal campaign;
• testing a sample before choosing whether a deeper review is worthwhile.

When to choose Deep

Deep is a better fit when you are:

• reviewing an old list that has not been used recently;
• deciding how cautiously to handle a high-value campaign;
• assessing a list with less certain collection history;
• separating contacts for further review before you decide whether you have a valid basis to contact them.

Deep takes longer when the receiving systems can be consulted. Jobs continue in the background, so use the progress view and return when the result is ready instead of relying on a fixed completion time.

Compare the cost before committing

The dashboard performs the useful calculation for you. It separates a Deep list into addresses charged at the full Deep rate and addresses charged at the regular rate. That makes it possible to choose Deep for the part of a list where it may add evidence, without guessing from a domain name or from a generic time estimate.

If you use the API, the bulk response provides the same information in credits_charged and breakdown. Save those values with an automated job log so a retry and a later invoice review are easy to reconcile.

A sensible workflow

1. Run a small representative sample in Quick mode.
2. Review the score mix and the detailed reasons, not only the Safe count.
3. Use Deep for the segment where more evidence could affect your decision.
4. Export separate groups and keep monitoring bounces, complaints and opt-outs after sending.

When neither mode is the answer

Do not use a verifier as a reason to revive an unconsented list, ignore an unsubscribe or bypass a provider's sending rules. If the contact source is unclear, solve that source problem first. The most useful verification result is often the one that tells you to pause and improve the collection process.

See Reading Email Verification Results for how to act on the result categories.