Plain text vs HTML emails. This debate has been going on for like 15 years and people still get it wrong. (For the HTML side, see our email design best practices. For copy that converts in any format, check email copywriting tips. And always A/B test both formats.)
The question isn't "which is better." That's a dumb question with no answer.
The question is "which one is right for what I'm trying to accomplish with this specific email." And that has a clear answer. Usually.
The Core Difference
HTML emails have formatting. Images, buttons, colors, columns, fonts. They look like a designed webpage.
Plain text emails have no formatting. Just words. Like an email you'd send to a friend. Or your mom. Or your boss.
That's it. That's the difference.
But the implications of that difference are massive.
When HTML Wins
HTML is the right choice when visual presentation matters.
Ecommerce product showcases. You're selling shoes. You need to show the shoes. A plain text email that says "We have nice shoes, click here to see them" is not going to move product like a beautiful image of the shoes.
Brand consistency. If your brand is built on aesthetics, consistency matters. Apple doesn't send plain text emails. Neither does Nike. The visual experience IS part of the brand.
Complex information. When you have a comparison table, a step-by-step process with visuals, or multiple CTAs going to different places, HTML handles that better. Plain text would be a mess.
Newsletters with multiple sections. If your email has different content blocks (featured article, upcoming events, sponsor message), HTML lets you organize that clearly.
Promotional campaigns. Sales, launches, announcements. These typically need the visual punch that HTML provides.
When Plain Text Wins
Plain text is the right choice when authenticity matters.
Relationship-building emails. When you want to feel like a real person writing to another real person, plain text is unbeatable. It looks like a normal email. Because it is.
Personal outreach. If you're emailing someone specific (even as part of an automated sequence), plain text reads as genuine. HTML reads as marketing.
Cold email. This one is huge. Cold email that looks like marketing gets deleted. Cold email that looks like a real person took 30 seconds to write? That gets read. HTML templates are the kiss of death for cold outreach.
Replies and follow-ups. If the purpose of your email is to get a reply, plain text wins. People are more likely to reply to something that looks like a regular email than something that looks like a campaign.
Deliverability-first situations. Heavily designed HTML emails trigger more spam filters. Plain text sails through. If you're landing in spam with HTML, try stripping it down.
The Data (Sort Of)
Here's where it gets murky. You can find studies supporting both sides.
Some data points that are probably true:
- Plain text emails often have higher reply rates in B2B contexts
- HTML emails often have higher click rates for ecommerce
- Heavily image-based HTML emails get blocked by some email clients (images don't load by default in many corporate environments)
- Plain text loads faster on slow connections and older devices
- HTML with a single clear CTA button often outperforms plain text links for purchase-intent emails
But here's the thing. These are generalizations. Your list is specific.
The only data that matters is data from your own audience with your own content.
The Authenticity Question
There's a psychological thing happening here that most marketers miss.
When someone sees an HTML email, they know it was designed. They know it was crafted. They know it went through a process.
This can be good. It says "we're professional, we put effort into this."
But it can also be bad. It says "this is marketing, this is a campaign, you are a recipient not a person."
Plain text says "I just typed this and hit send." Even when that's not true.
For relationship-focused businesses (coaching, consulting, services, high-ticket anything), that perception matters a lot.
I've seen agencies switch from beautiful HTML templates to plain text and watch their reply rates triple. The emails felt real now. People responded.
The Hybrid Approach
Here's my actual recommendation for most businesses:
Promotional/announcement emails: HTML Use design when you're selling, launching, or showcasing something visual.
Relationship/nurture emails: Plain text Use plain text when you're building trust, telling stories, or trying to start conversations.
Transactional emails: Light HTML Order confirmations and receipts benefit from structured formatting, but don't need to be full-on designed campaigns.
This gives you the best of both. Your brand emails look polished. Your personal emails feel personal.
Most email platforms let you use both without any friction. You're not picking one forever.
The Mobile Consideration
Here's something that's changed the equation.
More than half of emails are opened on mobile now. On a phone screen, heavily designed HTML emails often look worse than they do on desktop.
Images get compressed. Columns don't adapt well. Text becomes unreadable.
Meanwhile, plain text looks... exactly the same. It's just text. It works everywhere.
If your HTML isn't responsive (and a lot of older templates aren't), you might actually be hurting yourself on mobile without realizing it.
Common Mistakes
Using HTML when plain text would work better. Not everything needs a header image and a designed footer. If you're just telling someone something, just tell them.
Plain text that's actually just bad HTML. I've seen "plain text" emails that are actually HTML with styling stripped out, and they look broken. Links formatted weird, spacing off. If you're going plain text, actually go plain text.
Beautiful HTML that doesn't work on mobile. Designing for desktop and hoping mobile figures itself out. It won't.
Never testing the difference. Running the same format for years without ever A/B testing the alternative. You might be leaving performance on the table.
A/B Testing This Properly
If you want to actually know what works for your audience:
Take one of your regular recurring emails (like a weekly newsletter or nurture sequence email).
Create two versions:
- Version A: Your normal HTML design
- Version B: Pure plain text with the same content
Send 50% of your list each version for a few sends.
Track:
- Open rate (might be similar)
- Click rate (likely different)
- Reply rate (if replies matter to you)
- Unsubscribe rate (tells you if one feels spammy)
Now you have data. Specific to your audience. Not generic advice from a blog post.
The Deliverability Factor
One thing plain text advocates always bring up: deliverability.
It's true that spam filters look at HTML more suspiciously than plain text. Heavy image-to-text ratios, certain HTML patterns, excessive styling can all trigger filters.
But modern HTML emails from reputable senders generally don't have deliverability problems.
Where this matters more:
- Cold email (plain text is nearly mandatory)
- New domains still building reputation
- Lists with questionable hygiene
- B2B sending to corporate email servers
If you're a known sender with a clean list, HTML probably isn't hurting your deliverability.
If you're doing outreach to people who don't know you, HTML is probably hurting a lot.
My Hot Take
Most businesses over-design their emails.
They spend hours on templates when their audience would engage more with a simple, well-written message.
There's a lot of "we need to look professional" anxiety driving design decisions that actually hurt performance.
The most successful email marketers I know use embarrassingly simple formats. Sometimes literally just black text on white background with a single link.
Because the words matter more than the wrapper.
If your email is good, people will click regardless of how it looks. If your email is bad, no amount of design will save it.
Start with the content. Add design only when it genuinely helps.