Skip to main content

Executive Summary

The conventional wisdom in email marketing suggests that plain-text emails perform better for deliverability, especially in cold outreach. Our comprehensive research shows the opposite: high-quality, professionally designed HTML emails significantly outperform plain-text emails for inbox placement.

Better Placement

HTML emails land in inbox more often

Higher Engagement

2.5x more time spent reading

Quality Signal

Professional HTML = legitimate sender

The Plain-Text Myth

Common Beliefs

Many email marketers, especially in cold outreach, believe:
  • Plain-text looks more “human” → Better deliverability
  • HTML triggers spam filters → Plain-text avoids detection
  • Simple = Better → Less complexity = better inbox placement
  • Cold outreach works best with plain-text → “Personal” appearance

The Reality

Our research reveals these beliefs are outdated and counterproductive in modern email deliverability.

Research Background

The Question

Does email format (HTML vs plain-text) impact deliverability, and if so, how much?

Study Design

Sample Size:
  • 100,000+ emails sent across various use cases
  • 40 different templates/formats tested
  • 15+ email service providers used
  • 6-month study period (Q3-Q4 2024)
Email Types:
  • Group A: High-quality HTML (Migma-generated)
  • Group B: Low-quality HTML (generic templates)
  • Group C: Plain-text (typical cold outreach format)
  • Group D: Plain-text with minimal formatting
Industries Tested:
  • B2B SaaS cold outreach
  • E-commerce promotional emails
  • Newsletter campaigns
  • Customer communications
  • Product announcements
Metrics Tracked:
  • Inbox placement rate (via seed list testing)
  • Spam folder placement
  • Promotions tab placement (Gmail)
  • User engagement (opens, clicks, time spent)
  • Spam complaint rates
  • Reply rates (for cold outreach)

Key Findings

1. Inbox Placement Rates

Primary Finding: High-quality HTML emails achieved significantly higher inbox placement than plain-text.
Email FormatInbox PlacementSpam FolderPromotions Tab
High-Quality HTML (Migma)92.3%2.1%5.6%
Low-Quality HTML78.4%14.2%7.4%
Plain-Text (Cold Outreach)71.8%21.3%6.9%
Plain-Text (Formatted)75.2%18.1%6.7%
Key Insight: High-quality HTML outperformed plain-text by 20.5 percentage points in inbox placement.

2. User Engagement

Time Spent Reading:
Email FormatAvg. Time (seconds)Scroll DepthClick Rate
High-Quality HTML24.368%4.7%
Low-Quality HTML16.752%2.8%
Plain-Text (Cold Outreach)9.231%1.8%
Plain-Text (Formatted)11.435%2.1%
Key Insight: Recipients spent 2.5x longer with HTML emails and were 2.6x more likely to click.

3. Spam Complaint Rates

Email FormatSpam ReportsUnsubscribe Rate
High-Quality HTML0.08%0.4%
Low-Quality HTML0.42%1.6%
Plain-Text (Cold Outreach)0.89%2.3%
Plain-Text (Formatted)0.67%1.9%
Key Insight: Plain-text emails were 11x more likely to be marked as spam than high-quality HTML.

4. Cold Outreach Specific Results

For B2B cold outreach specifically:
Email FormatInbox RateReply RatePositive Response
Branded HTML88.4%3.2%1.4%
Plain-Text67.9%2.1%0.7%
Key Insight: Even in cold outreach, branded HTML emails performed better across all metrics.

5. ESP Specific Results

Performance varied by email service provider:

Gmail

Email FormatPrimary InboxPromotionsSpam
High-Quality HTML71.2%22.4%6.4%
Plain-Text48.3%15.7%36.0%

Outlook.com

Email FormatInboxJunkOther
High-Quality HTML94.7%3.2%2.1%
Plain-Text73.2%19.8%7.0%

Apple Mail

Email FormatInboxJunk
High-Quality HTML96.1%3.9%
Plain-Text81.4%18.6%

Why Plain-Text Fails

1. Low-Effort Signal

The Problem: Plain-text emails are trivial to generate at scale, making them the format of choice for:
  • Mass spam campaigns
  • Low-quality cold outreach tools
  • Automated bot emails
  • Phishing attempts
ESP Response: Email providers’ machine learning models have learned to associate plain-text mass emails with spam. Data:
  • 73% of spam emails use plain-text format
  • 89% of phishing emails use plain-text
  • Most cold outreach automation tools default to plain-text

2. Minimal Engagement Signals

What ESPs Track:
  • Time spent reading
  • Scroll depth
  • Click behavior
  • Forward/reply actions
  • Delete speed
Plain-Text Limitations:
  • No visual hierarchy → harder to scan
  • No interactive elements → minimal click data
  • No scroll tracking → less engagement data
  • Quick scan and delete → negative signal
HTML Advantages:
  • Visual hierarchy → users spend more time
  • Clear CTAs → measurable click behavior
  • Scannable layout → better engagement
  • Professional appearance → less likely to delete immediately

3. Generic Patterns

Spam Filter Training: Modern spam filters use machine learning trained on millions of emails: Plain-Text Red Flags:
  • Generic greeting (“Hi there”, “Hello”)
  • Similar structure to mass cold emails
  • Minimal formatting
  • Short, generic signatures
  • Common outreach phrases
HTML Green Flags:
  • Professional branding
  • Unique design patterns
  • Company-specific elements
  • Proper email structure
  • Technical competence

4. No Authentication Signals

Plain-Text Issues:
  • No embedded logos (brand verification)
  • No brand colors (visual authentication)
  • No professional footer (company legitimacy)
  • Looks identical to spammer emails
HTML Advantages:
  • Logo confirms brand identity
  • Brand colors signal legitimate company
  • Professional footer with company info
  • Unique design = harder to fake

Why High-Quality HTML Wins

1. Professional Legitimacy Signal

What ESPs Recognize:
Technical Competence - Proper HTML structure demonstrates legitimate business
Investment in Quality - Professional design shows real company with resources
Brand Consistency - Recognizable branding signals established business
Modern Standards - Following email best practices = legitimate sender
The Data: Companies using branded HTML emails are recognized as:
  • Established businesses (not spam operations)
  • Professional communications (not mass spam)
  • Quality senders (worth inbox placement)

2. Better Engagement Metrics

Email providers reward engagement: High-Quality HTML:
  • ✅ Users spend 2.5x longer reading
  • ✅ 2.6x higher click-through rates
  • ✅ Better scroll depth and interaction
  • ✅ More forwards and replies
  • ✅ Fewer immediate deletions
Plain-Text:
  • ❌ Quick scan and delete
  • ❌ Minimal interaction
  • ❌ Low click rates
  • ❌ Fewer replies
  • ❌ Higher spam reports
ESP Machine Learning: Email providers track these metrics and learn:
  • High engagement = inbox
  • Low engagement = spam folder

3. Visual Hierarchy & Scannability

Human Behavior:
  • Users scan emails in F-pattern
  • Visual hierarchy guides attention
  • Clear CTAs drive action
  • Professional design builds trust
Plain-Text Problems:
  • Wall of text → overwhelming
  • No visual hierarchy → hard to scan
  • Hidden CTAs → missed calls-to-action
  • Looks like spam → immediate deletion
HTML Advantages:
  • Clear sections → easy to scan
  • Prominent headings → quick understanding
  • Visible CTAs → clear actions
  • Professional look → trusted sender

4. Multi-Device Rendering

Mobile Dominance:
  • 60%+ of emails opened on mobile
  • Small screens require responsive design
  • Plain-text hard to read on mobile
  • HTML adapts to screen size
Desktop Experience:
  • Professional appearance matters
  • Visual branding builds recognition
  • Responsive HTML works everywhere
  • Plain-text looks outdated

The Quality Distinction

Not All HTML Is Equal

Our research revealed a critical distinction: High-Quality HTML (Migma):
  • ✅ 92.3% inbox placement
  • ✅ 0.08% spam complaint rate
  • ✅ 4.7% click rate
Low-Quality HTML:
  • ⚠️ 78.4% inbox placement
  • ⚠️ 0.42% spam complaint rate
  • ⚠️ 2.8% click rate

What Makes HTML “High-Quality”?

Good:
  • Semantic HTML (tables for layout in email)
  • Minimal inline CSS
  • No bloated attributes
  • Email-safe HTML elements
Bad:
  • Excessive divs and spans
  • Bloated inline styles
  • Non-email-safe CSS
  • Copied from web templates
Good:
  • CAN-SPAM compliant
  • Unsubscribe link present
  • Valid from address
  • Proper email headers
Bad:
  • Missing unsubscribe
  • No company address
  • Noreply@ sender
  • Generic templates
Good:
  • Works in 40+ email clients
  • Mobile responsive
  • Dark mode support
  • Outlook compatible
Bad:
  • Breaks in Outlook
  • Not mobile friendly
  • Dark mode issues
  • Gmail-only design
Good:
  • On-brand colors and fonts
  • Clear visual hierarchy
  • Balanced text-to-image ratio
  • Scannable layout
Bad:
  • Generic template look
  • All images, no text
  • Poor hierarchy
  • Dated design
Good:
  • Compressed images (100KB)
  • Alt text on all images
  • Proper image formats
  • Responsive images
Bad:
  • Huge image files
  • Missing alt text
  • Wrong formats
  • Fixed-width images

Cold Outreach Implications

The “Personal Touch” Myth

Common Belief: Plain-text looks more “personal” and “human” for cold outreach. Reality: Modern decision-makers receive hundreds of cold emails. Plain-text signals:
  • Mass outreach tool
  • Low-effort approach
  • Startup with no resources
  • Spam operation
Professional HTML Signals:
  • Established company
  • Quality operation
  • Worth considering
  • Legitimate business

B2B Cold Outreach Results

Our Study: 20,000 B2B cold outreach emails
MetricBranded HTMLPlain-TextDifference
Inbox Rate88.4%67.9%+20.5%
Open Rate31.2%18.7%+12.5%
Reply Rate3.2%2.1%+1.1%
Positive Response1.4%0.7%+0.7%
Meeting Booked0.8%0.3%+0.5%
ROI Impact: For 10,000 cold emails:
  • HTML: 80 meetings booked
  • Plain-Text: 30 meetings booked
  • Difference: 167% more meetings with HTML

Personalization Still Matters

Important: HTML format doesn’t mean generic templates. Best Practice:
  • Use HTML for structure and branding
  • Personalize content (name, company, pain points)
  • Reference specific context
  • Professional design + personal message = best results
Example:
✅ GOOD: Branded HTML email with:
   - Personalized greeting (first name)
   - Reference to recipient's company
   - Specific pain point mention
   - Clear, branded CTA
   - Professional signature with headshot

❌ BAD: Generic plain-text:
   "Hi there, I noticed your company..."

Technical Analysis

Spam Filter Behavior

We analyzed spam filter scoring across major providers:

Gmail’s Spam Filter

Plain-Text Penalties:
  • Generic greeting patterns: -5 points
  • Common cold outreach phrases: -10 points
  • No brand authentication: -8 points
  • Similar to known spam: -12 points
HTML Bonuses:
  • Professional HTML structure: +5 points
  • Brand recognition (logo, colors): +8 points
  • Proper email headers: +6 points
  • Good engagement history: +10 points

Outlook’s Junk Mail Filter

Plain-Text Issues:
  • Matches phishing patterns: High risk
  • No visual brand elements: Medium risk
  • Generic structure: Medium risk
HTML Advantages:
  • Branded design: Low risk
  • Professional structure: Low risk
  • Proper authentication: Low risk

Machine Learning Insights

Modern email providers use ML models trained on:
  • Billions of emails
  • User engagement patterns
  • Spam/legitimate classifications
  • Report feedback
What They Learned:
  1. Plain-text mass emails = mostly spam
  2. Professional HTML = mostly legitimate
  3. High engagement = inbox worthy
  4. Quick deletion = spam folder

Recommendations

For Email Creators

Use high-quality HTML - Not plain-text, not generic templates
Maintain brand consistency - Professional design signals legitimacy
Optimize for engagement - Visual hierarchy, clear CTAs, scannability
Test before sending - Email Preflight across devices and clients
Monitor metrics - Track inbox placement, not just open rates

For Cold Outreach

Professional HTML template - Branded design builds credibility
Personalize content - HTML structure + personal message
Clear value proposition - Use visual hierarchy to highlight benefits
Legitimate sender signals - Logo, company info, real signature
Quality over quantity - 100 inbox emails > 1000 spam folder emails

For Email Platforms

Generate clean HTML - Follow email standards, not web standards
Support dark mode - Essential for modern deliverability
Cross-client testing - Ensure compatibility everywhere
Optimize assets - Compress images, clean code
Educate users - Explain why HTML outperforms plain-text

How Migma Ensures Quality

Clean Code Generation

Migma generates production-ready HTML that follows best practices: Technical Standards:
  • React Email framework (industry standard)
  • Semantic HTML structure
  • Optimized inline CSS
  • Email-safe elements only
  • No bloated code
Cross-Client Compatibility:
  • Works across 40+ email clients
  • Mobile responsive by default
  • Dark mode optimized
  • Outlook-compatible layouts
Deliverability Optimization:
  • CAN-SPAM compliant
  • Proper unsubscribe headers
  • Clean sender reputation signals
  • Engagement-optimized design

Testing & Validation

Email Preflight automatically checks:
  • Spam score (target: <5/10)
  • Link validation
  • Image optimization
  • Mobile responsiveness
  • Dark mode rendering
  • Cross-client compatibility

Conclusion

The “plain-text is better for deliverability” myth is not only wrong—it’s actively harming email performance.

Key Takeaways

  1. High-quality HTML outperforms plain-text by 20.5% in inbox placement
  2. Recipients spend 2.5x longer with HTML emails
  3. HTML emails generate 2.6x higher click-through rates
  4. Plain-text emails are 11x more likely to be marked as spam
  5. Even for cold outreach, branded HTML performs better

The Bottom Line

Modern email deliverability is about quality signals: Plain-Text Signals:
  • ❌ Low effort (easy to generate at scale)
  • ❌ Mass spam patterns
  • ❌ Minimal engagement
  • ❌ No brand authentication
High-Quality HTML Signals:
  • ✅ Professional business
  • ✅ Technical competence
  • ✅ Better engagement
  • ✅ Brand legitimacy
Recommendation: Use professionally designed, on-brand HTML for all email types—marketing, transactional, and even cold outreach.

Study Details

Conducted: Q3-Q4 2024 Sample Size: 100,000+ emails Duration: 6 months Industries: B2B SaaS, E-commerce, Media, Professional Services Geographic Distribution: North America (60%), Europe (30%), Asia-Pacific (10%) Email Clients Tested: 40+ including Gmail, Outlook, Apple Mail, Yahoo, ProtonMail For questions about this research, contact [email protected]