%/email-for-growth-teams providers ↗
← all providers
Testing

MailCatcher

Tiny Ruby-based local SMTP catcher.

overview

MailCatcher is a Ruby gem that runs a local SMTP server on port 1025 and a web UI on 1080. It is common in Rails projects and shows the HTML, plain-text, and raw-source version of each captured message. Development is slow, so Mailpit is usually the stronger default today.

for growth and lifecycle teams

Growth work lives or dies on targeting and measurement. What matters is whether behavioral triggers can be built without engineering time, whether the event stream supports attribution past the open, and whether deliverability holds when broadcast volume shares a reputation with product email.

Against behavior-triggered journeys, broadcasts, and winback campaigns measured on revenue, MailCatcher covers none of the capabilities this audience leans on (scheduling, event stream, the suppressions API, and multi-tenant support), so it fits only where those needs are genuinely absent.

  • Scheduling: No
  • Event stream: No
  • Deliverability: Not applicable.
  • Operating since: Not published
  • Suppressions API: No
  • Best published rate per 1,000: Tiers not published in comparable form
  • Multi-tenant: No
  • Free tier: Free, MIT-licensed
  • Starts at: Free
deliverability

Not applicable.

best for

Rails teams already running it in development.

not great for

Non-Ruby projects, which get a lighter setup from Mailpit.

pros
  • Installs as a Ruby gem, familiar in Rails stacks
  • SMTP on 1025 with a web UI and JSON API on 1080
  • Shows HTML, plain text, and raw source per message
cons
  • Release cadence is slow with little active feature work
  • Needs a Ruby runtime where Mailpit ships a static binary
  • HTML rendering trails newer catchers

Features at a glance

API Yes
SMTP Yes
SDKs None
Webhooks No
Templates none
React Email No
Batch send No
Scheduled send No
Suppressions No
Multi-tenant No
Inbound parsing No
Event stream No
Idempotency keys No
Dedicated IP No

Appears in rankings

Compared with