Himalayas vs mail.tm

Same instrument, two spec sheets — measured, not claimed.

Uptime · 30d
Uptime · 90d99.02%84.3%
Uptime · 30d98.3%75.0%
P50 · ms263709
P95 · ms37832351
Authnonenone
CORSnono
HTTPSyesyes
Card requirednono
Commercial useunclearunclear
Data licenseUnverifiedUnverified
Free tierFree — limits not publishedFree — temporary mailboxes
Rate limitUnpublishedRate limited (429 on exceed); exact policy per docs.mail.tm
In directory since2026-07-052026-07-05
operationalpartialdownno data

Himalayas vs mail.tm: common questions

Which is more reliable, Himalayas or mail.tm?

On our scheduled checks, Himalayas leads on measured uptime — Himalayas at 99.02% versus mail.tm at 84.3% over 90 days. These are our own probe results, not provider claims; the uptime bars above show the day-by-day record for both.

Which is faster, Himalayas or mail.tm?

Himalayas has the lower median latency in our checks — Himalayas responds in 263 ms versus mail.tm at 709 ms (P50). Tail latency (P95) is in the table above; for most workloads the median is the number that shapes how the API feels.

Do Himalayas and mail.tm need an API key?

Neither needs a paid key — Himalayas is callable with no signup, and mail.tm is callable with no signup. Both are quick to prototype with; rate limits still apply.

Can I call Himalayas and mail.tm from the browser?

Neither sends browser-friendly CORS headers reliably, so call Himalayas and mail.tm from a server or proxy rather than client-side. The CORS and HTTPS rows above show exactly what we detected for each.

Are Himalayas and mail.tm free for commercial use?

Himalayas has unclear commercial terms, and mail.tm has unclear commercial terms. We track service terms and the data license as separate fields — see the Commercial use and Data license rows above, and confirm both before shipping either in a paid product.