An email tool evaluation sheet for CRM teams.
An email tool evaluation sheet is one table a CRM team fills in for every tool it considers: the same criteria, the same weights and the same real brief. Score what each tool does with your brief, your guide and your ESP, not what its demo shows. Set the weights before the first demo.
The sheet.
Copy the table into a spreadsheet, one column per tool. The sheet scores no vendor and ranks none: it is blank until your team fills it in.
| Criterion | What to check in the trial | Weight | Tool A | Tool B | Tool C |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Drafts only, or can send | Can the tool send email on its own, or does it only create drafts that a person approves and sends from your ESP? Which one does your team want? | ||||
| Checks copy against your own guide | Does it check copy against your brand’s voice guide and word list, or against a general idea of good writing? Does it say which rule a line breaks? | ||||
| Per-market editions | From one master, does it make an edition per market with that market’s language, prices, links, legal line and send time, or only translate? | ||||
| Uses your own blocks | Does it build from your approved email modules, or from its own templates that you then restyle? | ||||
| ESP integrations | Does it connect to your ESP, and what arrives there: a draft campaign, a template, or HTML to paste? Who can see it in the ESP? | ||||
| Data handling and sub-processors | Where is your data stored and processed? Is there a data processing agreement and a current list of sub-processors? Is your data used to train models? | ||||
| Pricing unit | Is it priced per seat, per brand, per send or per credit? What does it cost when you add a person, a market or a brand? | ||||
| Review and approval trail | Can you see who reviewed and approved which version, and when? Does a change after approval need approval again? | ||||
| Exit and data export | If you leave, what can you take with you, in what format, and what happens to your data afterwards? | ||||
| Total (sum of weight × score) |
The scales
Use the same scales for every tool.
- Weight 3: Must have. A tool scoring 0 here is out, whatever its total.
- Weight 2: Matters to how your team works every week.
- Weight 1: Nice to have.
- Weight 0: Not relevant to your team. Leave the row in, so the next evaluation sees it was considered.
- Score 3: Shown working in your trial, with your brief.
- Score 2: Works, with a workaround your team can live with.
- Score 1: Promised, or shown only in the vendor’s own demo.
- Score 0: Not there, or not answered.
Plain text, ready to copy.
Paste these lines into a doc or a ticket, once per tool. Nothing on this page is stored or sent.
Tool:
Trial dates:
Brief used:
Drafts only, or can send: weight / score / note
Checks copy against our guide: weight / score / note
Per-market editions: weight / score / note
Uses our own blocks: weight / score / note
ESP integration: weight / score / note
Data handling and sub-processors: weight / score / note
Pricing unit: weight / score / note
Review and approval trail: weight / score / note
Exit and data export: weight / score / note
Total:
Must-have criteria scoring 0:
Scored by:
How do you run a trial with one real brief?
Run every trial on the same real brief, one your team has already sent, so you can compare each tool’s output with an email you know was right. A vendor’s sample brief shows the tool at its strongest; yours shows it on your work.
- Pick one past brief with at least two markets, a price and a legal line, so the hard parts are in the test. The email brief template has the fields.
- Give every tool the same inputs: the brief, your voice guide and your blocks, and nothing else.
- Let your team run it, not the vendor. Note every step where someone had to fix, paste or ask.
- Check the output with the same checklist for every tool. The email QA checklist covers each market.
- Follow the draft into your ESP. Look at what arrived, and who could see or send it.
- Score straight after the trial, with two people scoring apart and then agreeing.
What should you ask every vendor?
Ask every vendor the same questions in writing, and keep the answers with the sheet. An answer you cannot find later scores 0.
- Can the tool send an email without a person approving it? Can that be switched off?
- When the tool checks copy, which rules does it check against, and where do those rules come from?
- What arrives in our ESP, and with which permissions does the tool connect?
- Where is our data stored and processed, and which sub-processors handle it? How are we told about a new one?
- Is our content used to train or improve models, for us or for anyone else?
- What does the price depend on: seats, brands, markets, sends or credits? What happens at a limit?
- Who approved each version of an email, and can we export that record?
- When we leave, what do we get back, in what format, and when is our data deleted?
Under the GDPR, a processor may only engage another processor with the controller’s prior written authorisation, and the controller must be told of changes so it can object [1]. The contract must also say whether personal data is deleted or returned when the service ends [1]. Have your data protection lead read the answers; this page is not legal advice.
How do you read the scores?
Read the must-haves first, then the totals. A tool that scores 0 on a criterion weighted 3 is out, however high its total. Among the tools left, the totals show how well each one fits your team’s work on paper; the notes show why.
Look at where the scores came from. A 3 means your team saw it work on your brief; a 1 means a promise. Two tools with the same total can be far apart if one total is built on promises.
Where Caliber fits.
Caliber is not scored on this page. It is being built so that one approved brief will become a draft per market, checked against your own guide and built from your own blocks, for a named person to approve. Drafts go to your ESP through Caliber’s integrations with Klaviyo, Braze, Salesforce Marketing Cloud Next, Voyado, Customer.io and Iterable. Score it like any other tool.
Questions
How do you evaluate an email tool?
Agree the criteria and their weights before any demo, then run each tool on the same real brief, with your own guide and blocks. Check the output with one checklist, follow the draft into your ESP, and score each criterion from what your team saw. Ask every vendor the same questions in writing.
Why does it matter whether a tool is priced per seat or per brand?
The pricing unit decides what growth costs. A per-seat price rises when you add a writer or a reviewer, so teams tend to keep reviewers out of the tool. A per-brand price rises when you add a brand or a market. Check which of the two your team is more likely to add.
Should an email tool be able to send on its own?
That is a choice for your team, and the sheet asks it first. A tool that only creates drafts keeps sending in your ESP, behind a named person’s approval. A tool that can send needs a clear rule for who approves what, and a way to switch sending off.
How many tools should a CRM team compare?
As many as you can trial properly on the same brief. A shortlist made from the must-have criteria, before any demo, keeps the number down. A tool you could not trial on your own brief should not get a score above 1 for anything it only showed in a demo.
Sources
- European Parliament and Council, “Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (General Data Protection Regulation)”, 27 Apr 2016, Article 28(2) and 28(3)(g). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2016/679/oj (checked 1 Nov 2026)