Bing Ads vs Google Ads: is Microsoft Ads worth it?

For most advertisers the honest answer is not either-or: start on Google for the volume, then add Microsoft Ads (the platform formerly called Bing Ads) once you want cheaper clicks and a slightly older, higher-income, desktop-heavy audience. Google handles about 90.39% of worldwide searches and 85.51% in the United States, while Bing sits at 5.03% worldwide and 9.65% in the US (Source: Statcounter, May 2026). So Google is where the demand lives, but Microsoft’s network is far from empty, and the clicks there usually cost less because fewer advertisers are bidding for them.

Below is how the two platforms actually differ, who each one suits, and how to decide where your budget goes first.

The short version

Google Ads gives you the largest search audience on the planet and the deepest set of campaign types, so it is almost always the first place to spend. Microsoft Ads gives you a smaller but real audience, lower competition on many keywords, and targeting options Google does not offer, such as filtering by LinkedIn profile data. If your budget is tight, prove demand on Google first. If you already run Google and want to stretch the same budget further, Microsoft Ads is usually worth a test.

Reach: Google is bigger, but Bing is not nothing

Search share is the starting point. In the US, Google handles 85.51% of searches and Bing 9.65% (Source: Statcounter, May 2026). Microsoft’s search network does not stop at Bing, though. Yahoo and DuckDuckGo also draw on it, and together with Bing those engines account for close to one in seven US searches once you add Yahoo’s 2.62% and DuckDuckGo’s 1.67% (Source: Statcounter, May 2026).

Two practical takeaways. First, Google reaches more people, so it sets the ceiling on how much qualified traffic you can buy. Second, the audience on Microsoft’s network is not a rounding error, and because it is smaller and less contested, the people you do reach there can cost less to win.

Cost: fewer bidders usually means cheaper clicks

The reason Microsoft Ads tends to be cheaper is simple supply and demand. Far fewer advertisers compete for the same keywords on a network that handles a fraction of Google’s volume, so the auction pressure that drives up cost-per-click on Google is lighter. Many advertisers running the same keywords on both platforms see lower average click costs on Microsoft, which means a fixed budget can buy more clicks and, sometimes, more leads.

The caveat: cheaper clicks only matter if they convert. A lower cost-per-click on a smaller audience can still produce fewer total customers than a pricier click on Google’s larger one. The right way to read cost is per acquired customer, not per click, and that takes a few weeks of real spend on each platform to measure.

Audience: who you actually reach

Microsoft’s search audience skews differently from the web at large. It leans toward desktop and workplace use, an older age profile, and higher household income, partly because Bing is the default search engine in Windows and the Edge browser and shows up on a lot of office computers. That profile makes Microsoft Ads a strong fit for B2B, financial services, and considered, higher-ticket purchases, where reaching decision-makers on a work machine matters more than raw volume.

Google’s audience is everyone. That breadth is its strength for consumer demand and mobile-first categories, and its weakness if you are paying premium prices to reach a broad crowd when a narrower, more affluent one would convert better.

Features: where each platform pulls ahead

Google Ads has the wider toolkit: more campaign types, a larger partner display and video network through YouTube, and the deepest automation and bidding options. If you need Shopping, video, app, or Performance Max campaigns at scale, Google is more mature.

Microsoft Ads counters with a few things Google does not have. You can target ads by LinkedIn profile data, including industry, job function, and company, which is rare in search advertising and genuinely useful for B2B. You can also import an existing Google Ads account in a few clicks, so launching on Microsoft does not mean rebuilding everything from scratch. That import feature is the single biggest reason testing Microsoft Ads is low-effort once your Google account is running.

Bing Ads vs Google Ads at a glance

So, is Microsoft Ads worth it?

For a small business with a limited budget and no campaigns running yet, start on Google, prove that paid search produces customers at a cost you can live with, then expand. For a business already spending on Google, especially in B2B or a higher-ticket category, Microsoft Ads is usually worth a controlled test, because the import takes minutes and the clicks often cost less. The mistake is treating it as either-or. Run the platform that reaches your buyers most efficiently, and for many advertisers that ends up being both, weighted toward Google.

If you want a second set of eyes on which split fits your numbers, our Microsoft Ads management and Google Ads management pages explain how we run each, and the broader ecommerce PPC page covers multi-channel paid search.

What managing both costs

Paid search management is scoped to your goals rather than sold at a flat sticker, because ad spend, the number of campaigns, and how many platforms you run all change the work. We bill monthly, month-to-month with no lock-in, and you keep ownership of every ad account. The figure follows your scope, so a short call turns your budget and goals into a real quote, and our pricing page shows what we publish. Ad spend itself is paid to Google or Microsoft directly and is separate from management.

Frequently asked questions

Want help deciding where your paid search budget should go? Book a call and we will look at your goals and map a split across Google and Microsoft with you.

Sources

• Statcounter Global Stats, Search Engine Market Share Worldwide
• Statcounter Global Stats, Search Engine Market Share United States
• Statista, Bing search market share worldwide