Bullhorn emails going to spam? Check the product and route.

Identify which Bullhorn product sent it

“We use Bullhorn” is not a complete description of the route. Name the product and message type: an ATS message, an Automation campaign or another workflow. Then identify the affected sender and a specific example.

Bullhorn’s own preparation material distinguishes its products. Treat older deadlines in that material as history, and use the linked current product documentation for setup.

If ordinary mailbox replies arrive but an Automation sequence does not, keep both examples. That comparison is useful evidence that the routes need to be inspected separately; it does not by itself prove a fault in the platform.

For ATS, check the documented authentication setup

The ATS troubleshooting article directs customers to review SPF setup, sending volume and content. Have an authorised administrator compare the actual domain records with the account’s official instructions and the affected message.

Do not add another SPF record at the same hostname or paste an include from an unrelated product. Ask which envelope domain was checked and which domain supplied the DKIM signature. The alignment guide explains why a pass on a service domain is not automatically an aligned pass for your visible sender.

Use the received header to check the result after a configuration change. A screenshot of a DNS checker is not evidence about the exact message that went to spam.

For Automation, include the tracking domain

Bullhorn Automation’s current guidance includes verifying the sending domain and using a branded tracking domain. It refers to a product-issued CNAME in the relevant settings and support workflow. Use the value issued for your account, not an example copied from this page.

Record whether the affected message uses tracking links and whether that setup changed recently. Don’t assume removing every link is the permanent solution. A controlled comparison is more informative than changing domain records, tracking, copy and send volume together.

Separate expected messages from outreach

An interview update to an engaged candidate is a different communication from a large database mailshot. Keep the message type and recipient expectations in the investigation.

Review whether the affected contacts are current and whether sending volume changed sharply. A platform being correctly authenticated does not establish that every address is current or every recipient expects the email.

Use delivered versus inbox when dashboard opens or a delivered label are the only evidence you have.

Test the same workflow

If the problem concerns an Automation campaign, test the actual campaign route using authorised test recipients and a safe message. A direct Outlook send with different links is not a like-for-like comparison.

Record the product, sender identity, message version and test time. For an actual seed placement test, see the testing guide. Keep the report’s provider-level limitations with the result.

What to send support

Provide the Bullhorn product, sending account or workflow, precise time, message ID when available, full bounce if any and an original received-message header. Ask support to confirm the actual sending infrastructure and the correct account-specific authentication and tracking configuration.

Use the IT handoff builder to structure the brief. This guide is based on official documentation; it does not claim access to your Bullhorn tenant or screenshots from hands-on testing.