Which Email Marketing Trends Are Truly Worth It?

The Gist

• Which email marketing trends are still worth investing in? Send time optimization, countdown timers, modular design systems and multi-platform AI all deliver measurable returns — the operational lift is low and the payoff remains real.
• What's making some familiar tactics obsolete? Apple's Mail Privacy Protection, AI inbox summarizers like Gemini, and prefetching by major inbox providers are quietly eroding the effectiveness of all-image emails and hyper-personalization at scale.
• How should email marketers adapt their strategy? Prioritize coded, accessible emails over image-heavy builds, personalize within guardrails that protect brand messaging, and plan for a multi-model AI environment rather than loyalty to a single platform.

Editor's note: Six email marketing trends are evaluated here — all-image emails, send time optimization, hyper-personalization, countdown timers, modular email design systems and multi-platform AI. Four earn a thumbs up; two don't. The verdicts below draw on current inbox behavior, AI summarization impacts and real operational trade-offs.

Is the juice worth the squeeze?

That was the central question in the session by Scott Cohen and Ryan Phelan at the ANA’s The Next Chapter of Email Evolution event in Chicago last month. The duo asked the audience to give a variety of trends a thumbs up or thumbs down, and then called on people to defend their views.

Of course, the majority of the trends they asked about fall in between a simple yay or nay—because there are circumstances when they’re not worthwhile, developments that are undermining their effectiveness, or other caveats.

Let’s dive into some of them. I’ll share some pros and cons, plus my verdict.

Table of Contents

• All-Image Emails: A Liability for Accessibility and AI Readability
• Send Time Personalization: Still Worth Using, Despite MPP Erosion
• Hyper-Personalization: Effective in Moderation, Counterproductive at Scale
• Real-Time Countdown Timers: Still Effective, But Don't Overuse Them
• Email Design Systems: No Downsides for Programs at Scale
• Email Marketing Frequently Asked Questions
• Multi-Platform AI: The Future Is Multi-Model, Not Single-Model Loyalty

All-Image Emails: A Liability for Accessibility and AI Readability

These emails consist almost entirely of images. Using little HTML text, most of the copy is graphical—that is, embedded in images.

Pros:

• Designing all-image emails is undeniably easier than coding an email that uses HTML text extensively.
• Some personalization engines run entirely on images.

Cons:

• All-image emails aren’t accessible or user-friendly. They don’t work with screen readers, which may get you sued under the Americans with Disabilities Act. They keep subscribers from increasing font sizes to make your emails easier for them to read. They also can’t convey your message if images are blocked, or if images are slow to load in low-bandwidth environments.
• AIs currently can’t read graphical text, and most don’t read alt text either. With AI summaries playing a larger role in the inbox and in inbox management, all-image emails risk being invisible or wildly misrepresented by AI summaries.

Verdict: 👎All-image emails alienate both humans and machines. Coding solid and responsive email campaigns is the wise choice. The extra effort is more than worth it.

Related Article: Is Email the Best Path to AI Commerce Dominance?

Send Time Personalization: Still Worth Using, Despite MPP Erosion

STO uses email open and click times to dynamically determine the ideal time for future campaigns to be sent to an individual subscriber so they’re near the top of the person’s inbox.

Pros:

• It’s very easy to set up—like you literally just turn it on and it starts collecting data and optimizing accordingly.
• With the depreciation of opens by Apple’s Mail Privacy Protection (MPP), models have put a much heavier focus on click timing, which is a better intent signal, since you don’t just want your email to arrive when people are likely to open it, but rather when they’re likely to engage with it. Those aren’t necessarily the same time.

Cons:

• In the wake of MPP, STO is not as accurate, nor do ideal send times adapt as quickly to changing behaviors because there are fewer signals now.
• If you’re sending more than one promotional email a day, STO’s effectiveness is greatly reduced.
• The longstanding “first in, on top” hierarchy of the inbox is being eroded by Gmail’s sort by “Most relevant” functionality, making email delivery time less critical.
• With Gemini and other AI models summarizing the newest batch of emails to arrive in a user’s inbox, precise timing doesn’t matter.

Verdict: 👍 Despite the growing number of factors that are undermining it, using STO is still considerably better than sending at generic times, whether we’re talking about broadcast promotional campaigns or non-urgent triggered campaigns (i.e., a back-in-stock notification, product review request). Plus, the effort and costs associated with STO are super low.

Related Article: 10 More Common Email Marketing Mistakes — And Solutions

Hyper-Personalization: Effective in Moderation, Counterproductive at Scale

Beyond first-name merges and other basic tactics, hyper-personalization seeks to personalize nearly the entirety of most campaigns.

Pros:

• This approach accelerates campaign development, because most of the content is left up to personalization algorithms to populate.
• Subscribers are getting truly bespoke content, which can increase subscriber satisfaction and campaign performance.

Cons:

• Hyper-personalization can crowd out brand messaging and undermine your business goals, such as the need to liquidate excess inventory or to spotlight a new partnership.
• It can limit discovery by endlessly reinforcing existing narrow interests.
• When every customer is having a bespoke experience, the common brand experience can be eroded.

Verdict: 👎 Hyper-personalization can be too much of a good thing. Personalize, yes, but set limits and ensure you’re balancing customer interests with your business’s needs.

Related Article: The Hidden Dangers of Over-Personalization in Marketing

Real-Time Countdown Timers: Still Effective, But Don't Overuse Them

Urgency is one of marketers’ most powerful tools and real-time countdown timers bring that ticking clock into email campaigns to highlight the upcoming end of a sale or offer.

Pros:

• They’re very good at driving urgency.
• They’re easy to implement.

Cons:

• Prefetching and imaging caching by Apple Mail, Gmail and other inbox providers can undermine the accuracy of real-time countdown timers.

Verdict: 👍 While prefetching is widespread, the degree of inaccuracy it causes typically isn’t so much as to ruin the effectiveness of real-time countdown timers. Honestly, my advice is not to overuse countdown timers. That’s how effective they are.

Email Design Systems: No Downsides for Programs at Scale

Going by many names, including modular email architecture (MEA) and modular build systems, these replace old school static email templates. Instead, email design elements are created at the module level and then stacked up like LEGO bricks to create templates. Those templates remain flexible, so that modules can be easily added or removed, depending on the needs of a particular campaign.

Pros:

• MEA accelerates email build times, typically by around 25%.
• Maintenance of a MEA is easier than maintaining a bunch of static templates.
• Modular builds make personalization easier.
• Modular builds also make A/B testing simpler.

Cons:

• None, besides the investment in transitioning from static templates to a modular build system.

Verdict: 👍 For any email marketing program of significant scale, MEA is a no-brainer with no operational downsides.

Related Article: Which AI Path Will You Take as a Marketer?

Email Marketing Frequently Asked Questions

Editor's note: The following questions address the most common points of uncertainty raised by these six trends — covering deliverability risks, the post-MPP landscape, personalization limits and what modular architecture actually means in practice.

Multi-Platform AI: The Future Is Multi-Model, Not Single-Model Loyalty

There are a variety of major AI models available to marketers. Should you be varying your usage of platforms?

Pros:

• If you’re not using multiple models, then you won’t be able to appreciate how all of these models are evolving and how their relative performance on different tasks is changing.

Cons:

• If you stick with one model, it gets to know you better, which improves its answers for you.

Verdict: 👍 The future is solidly multi-platform. Not only will there be multiple general LLM models, but marketers will use an increasing number of models that have deep training on particular subjects like coding HTML landing pages and marketing and advertising law. Marketers will also use a variety of AI engines embedded in their martech stack that will have access to their data. They can use superagents to navigate their marketing platform, suggest next-best actions and access a range of task-specific agents, like subject line writing agents that leverage all of your historical performance data to make truly informed suggestions.

Email marketers have lots of choices about where to invest their time and budget. Those are four trends that are worth the squeeze, and two that aren’t.

Learn how you can join our contributor community.