Microsoft Ads usually wins on cost per click and Google wins on volume. Here is how to decide which to run, in what order, and how to import campaigns without wasting budget.
Google Ads and Microsoft Ads are not really competitors for your budget. They are two different sizes of the same opportunity. Google carries far more search volume, so it is where you prove that paid search can work for your offer at all. Microsoft Ads carries less volume but usually less competition for the same intent, so it is where you buy some of that same demand at a lower cost per click once you already know which keywords and which landing pages convert.
That ordering matters. Running Microsoft Ads first, on a small budget, in a narrow market, usually produces too little data to learn anything. Running it second, with proven keywords and proven creative imported from a working Google account, usually produces a cheaper blended cost per lead almost immediately.
Reach. Microsoft Ads serves the Bing network, which also powers search results on Yahoo, AOL and a syndicated network of partner sites, plus search inside Windows and Edge. Google serves Google Search, its own search partners, and the much larger Display and YouTube inventory. If your goal is raw volume, Google wins on size every time.
Competition and cost. Fewer advertisers bid on the Microsoft network, which is why the same keyword frequently clears at a lower cost per click there. The caveat is that cheaper clicks are only useful if they convert at a similar rate, which is a question your own data answers, not a platform benchmark.
Audience mix. Bing is the default search engine in Windows and Edge, which skews its audience toward desktop users on managed work machines. For a lot of B2B and considered purchases, that is a feature. For impulse mobile categories, it is usually a drawback.
Targeting. This is where Microsoft has a genuine capability Google does not: LinkedIn profile targeting. Because Microsoft owns LinkedIn, you can layer company, industry and job function onto a search campaign. For a B2B advertiser trying to reach operations leaders at manufacturing companies, that is a very different instrument than demographic guesswork.
Tooling maturity. Google ships automation and reporting features first. Microsoft follows, often closely, sometimes a year behind. If your strategy depends on the newest bid strategy or asset type, check availability before you plan around it.
The practical sequence looks like this. Build and stabilize a Google Ads account until you can name your winning keywords, your winning ad copy and your cost per qualified lead. Only then open Microsoft Ads. You are no longer testing whether paid search works for you. You are buying the proven version of it at a second price.
The exception is a market where you already know the audience lives on desktop at work: enterprise software, industrial supply, professional services, government adjacent work. In those categories Microsoft is worth testing earlier, and sometimes worth more per click than Google.
Microsoft Ads has a built in Google Ads import that will pull in campaigns, ad groups, keywords, ads, negatives, extensions and much of your structure. It is genuinely good, and it is also the single biggest source of silently wasted spend, because the import copies settings that do not mean the same thing on the other platform. After every import, review these before you let it serve:
Set the import to sync on a schedule once it is clean. That keeps keyword and negative changes flowing from the account you actively manage into the one you check weekly.
Treat Microsoft as an allocation, not a new line item. A common starting point is to move a modest share of total search budget there, watch cost per qualified lead for a full sales cycle, and then let the numbers decide. If Microsoft is cheaper per lead and the lead quality holds, increase its share until impression share stops growing, which it will do earlier than on Google because the available volume is smaller.
The failure mode to avoid is funding Microsoft by starving Google below the budget it needs to keep learning. Paid search rewards consistency on the platform with the most data.
Cost per click is the least useful number in this comparison, because it is the one Microsoft almost always wins. The numbers that settle the question are cost per qualified lead, close rate by platform and revenue per lead. Pass a platform parameter through your forms into your CRM so you can report on closed revenue by source rather than on form fills. A platform with pricier clicks and a better close rate is the cheaper platform.
Skip it, at least for now, if your total search budget is small enough that splitting it would leave neither account with enough conversions to optimize, if your audience is overwhelmingly mobile and consumer, or if your available Microsoft impression volume in your service area is negligible. Check that last one directly in the keyword planner before you build anything.
Google Ads:
Microsoft Ads:
Google is built for scale, while Microsoft is often better for cost efficiency.
Microsoft Ads is most effective when you want to:
However, due to lower traffic volume, scaling may be more limited.
Microsoft Ads also allows direct import of Google campaigns for faster setup.
When importing from Google Ads:
A common benchmark is allocating around 10 percent of your Google Ads budget to Microsoft Ads initially.
Microsoft Ads allows granular device targeting:
This improves budget efficiency and campaign control.
Microsoft Ads offers unique advantages:
These features make Microsoft Ads especially strong for B2B marketers.
Microsoft Ads works well as a testing environment because:
This creates a more efficient overall paid ads strategy.
Cost per click is usually lower on Microsoft Ads because fewer advertisers bid on the Bing network for the same keywords. Whether it is cheaper per lead depends on your conversion rate there, which only your own account data can tell you. Compare cost per qualified lead, not cost per click.
Google first in almost every case. It has the volume you need to learn which keywords, ads and landing pages convert. Once that is known, import the winners into Microsoft Ads and buy the same intent at a second price. The exception is a strongly desktop and work oriented B2B audience, where Microsoft is worth testing earlier.
Yes, Microsoft Ads has a built in import that brings over campaigns, ad groups, keywords, ads, negatives and extensions. Do not let it serve untouched. Review location targeting, device bid adjustments, ad schedule timezone, bid strategy and daily budgets, and install the UET tag with your conversion goals before launch.
No. Conversion actions do not transfer. You need the Microsoft UET tag on your site and conversion goals defined in the Microsoft Ads account, otherwise you will be spending without any way to evaluate the result.
Because Microsoft owns LinkedIn, Microsoft Ads lets you layer company, industry and job function onto search campaigns as targeting or bid adjustments. It is the one capability Microsoft has that Google does not, and it is the main reason B2B advertisers run the platform.
Start with a modest share of total search budget, hold it for a full sales cycle, then let cost per qualified lead decide. Keep increasing while impression share still has room to grow. Do not fund it by cutting Google below the level it needs to keep learning.
Somewhat. Bing is the default search engine in Windows and Edge, which skews the audience toward desktop users on work machines. That favors B2B and considered purchases and works against impulse mobile categories.
Usually not. They were tuned against Google traffic. On a more desktop weighted network, a mobile bid increase imported from Google can push spend exactly the wrong way. Reset them and rebuild from Microsoft data.
Only if you report on form fills. Pass the platform through your forms into your CRM so you can see closed revenue by source. Then two platforms is two clean comparisons rather than one blurred total.
When your total search budget is too small to give both accounts enough conversions to optimize, when your audience is overwhelmingly mobile and consumer, or when Microsoft keyword volume in your service area is negligible. Check the volume in the keyword planner before you build anything.
Our in-house team works directly with US-based marketers. Tell us what you are trying to grow and we will tell you what we would do first.
Drop in your website and we will record a short teardown: where you are losing traffic, who is outranking you, and the three things we would fix first.
A real person records it. No obligation, and we will only use your email to send the video and talk about it.