AnonAddy vs Postal
| Tagline | Self-hosted anonymous email forwarding with unlimited disposable aliases | Self-hosted mail delivery platform, a SendGrid/Mailgun alternative |
| Category | Email & Newsletters | Email & Newsletters |
| Replaces | Gmail / Google Workspace, Mailchimp, ConvertKit (Kit) | SendGrid |
| GitHub stars | 4.7k | 17k |
| Language | PHP | Ruby |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Self-host difficulty | 4/5 Involved | 4/5 Involved |
| Deploy options | Docker Docker Compose Manual | Docker Docker Compose Manual |
| Managed hosting | ||
| Last updated | 21 days ago | 9 days ago |
| View repo | View repo |
Where each falls short
The honest trade-offs — what you give up with each, versus the proprietary tools they replace.
AnonAddy
- Requires a properly configured Postfix MTA alongside the application, increasing setup complexity
- No newsletter or campaign functionality; alias forwarding only
- Mobile apps point to anonaddy.com by default; self-hosted URL must be configured manually
- No built-in spam filtering beyond what the upstream MTA provides
Postal
- You are responsible for IP reputation, warmup, and deliverability
- Requires MariaDB, RabbitMQ, and DNS/DKIM configuration to run
- No marketing-campaign UI — it is a delivery engine, not a newsletter builder
- Less hand-holding than managed providers for spam/blocklist issues
Bottom line
Both are a similar lift to self-host; choose Postal for the larger community and ecosystem. Postal has seen more recent development. Open each guide below for deploy steps and the full feature gap.