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

By Ahmed Imran · Updated June 2026 · 7 min read

Microsoft Ads, formerly Bing Ads, is worth running as a complement to Google, not a replacement. It carries far less search volume but cheaper clicks, less competition, and an older, higher income audience that skews B2B and desktop, and it lets you import your Google campaigns in a few clicks. Start with Google for volume, then add Microsoft to pick up cheaper conversions Google cannot reach.

Almost every US client asks me the same thing after Google Ads starts working: should I also be on Bing? My answer is usually yes, but as a second channel, not a first one. Microsoft Ads (the platform formerly called Bing Ads) gives you cheaper clicks and a wealthier, older audience, but only a fraction of Google's search volume. I run Google Ads as my core channel and import proven campaigns into Microsoft when the math works. Here is how the two actually compare, using current US numbers rather than vibes.

What is the difference between Google Ads and Microsoft Ads?

The bidding mechanics are nearly identical, but the networks are not. Both run a keyword auction where you bid on search terms and pay per click, and Microsoft's interface is close enough to Google's that the learning curve is small. The real difference is reach: Google Ads shows on Google search and its partners, while Microsoft Ads shows across Bing, Yahoo, DuckDuckGo, and AOL, plus Microsoft's audience network on sites like MSN and Outlook. Microsoft says this network reaches about 23% of US search volume and roughly 66 million searchers it says you cannot reach on Google alone. The other headline difference is that Microsoft lets you import your Google campaigns directly, so you are rarely building from scratch.

How much cheaper is Microsoft Ads?

Clicks on Microsoft Ads typically cost 30% to 50% less than the same keywords on Google, and often more in competitive verticals. WordStream data across industries puts the average Bing search CPC near $1.54, while average Google search CPCs sit higher, commonly in the $4 to $5 range depending on the category. The reason is simple supply and demand: fewer advertisers compete in Microsoft's smaller auction, so the bids that clear are lower. Because Bing holds roughly 10% of US search across all devices per Statcounter in 2026 (and materially more on desktop, where estimates run to the mid teens), a lot of advertisers ignore it, which keeps prices soft for those who show up.

Cheaper clicks do not automatically mean cheaper conversions, but they often do. On Microsoft, less bidding pressure plus an audience that skews toward buyers with money can push conversion rates up and cost per lead down for the right offer. I treat every Bing number as something to prove per account, not assume. When I imported one client's winning Google search campaign into Microsoft, the story was the same one I see across finance and B2B accounts: less volume, but a lower cost per conversion on the traffic that did come through.

Who wins on audience?

Microsoft wins on audience quality for B2B and higher income offers; Google wins on sheer size. Microsoft's own audience data and third party reporting both show Bing skews older and wealthier: more than 70% of its users are aged 35 to 65, about a third sit in households earning $100,000 or more, and management level searchers are more common (roughly 32% hold a manager title or above, versus about 24% on Google in reported comparisons). It also skews desktop, partly because Bing is the default search on Windows and in Microsoft Edge, so a large share of those searches happen on work computers during business hours.

That profile matters. If you sell to professionals, to finance and insurance buyers, to enterprise software users, or to an older consumer, the Bing audience is closer to your customer than the raw share numbers suggest. If you sell to a young, mobile first crowd, Google (and social) will reach far more of them. Audience fit, not just price, is what decides whether Bing is worth your time.

When should you add Microsoft Ads?

Add Microsoft Ads once Google is running and profitable, then import your winners. The sequence matters: Google gives you the volume to find which keywords, ads, and offers actually convert. Once you know that, Microsoft's Google Import tool copies those campaigns over in a few clicks, and you can schedule recurring daily, weekly, or monthly syncs so changes flow across automatically. Because you are cloning something already profitable, the effort to test Bing is low and the downside is small.

• ›You already have a Google Ads account that is generating leads or sales at a cost you are happy with.
• ›Your customers are B2B, finance, insurance, professional services, or an older, higher income consumer.
• ›You want incremental conversions at a lower cost per click without adding a whole new channel to manage.
• ›Your product does well on desktop, where Bing is strongest.

This is exactly the situation where I extend a client into Microsoft. My core work is Google Ads: results like Autobuffy at $1.5M in revenue over 8 months at a 6.89x return, or White Hat Insurance where I brought cost per lead from $300 down to $75, come from Google first. Once a campaign is that solid, importing it into Bing is a low risk way to squeeze out more of the same for less.

When is Microsoft Ads NOT worth it?

Microsoft Ads is not worth it when your budget is tiny, your audience is young and mobile first, or your search volume on Bing is simply too low to matter. If you are spending a small monthly budget that is already stretched thin on Google, splitting it across a second platform usually hurts both: neither auction gets enough data to optimize. In that case, put everything into Google until you outgrow it.

• ›Budgets so small that spreading them across two platforms starves both of conversion data.
• ›Audiences that are young, mobile first, or concentrated where Bing has little presence.
• ›Local or niche categories where Bing search volume for your keywords is close to nothing.
• ›Teams with no time to monitor a second account, when Google alone is not yet fully optimized.

The honest test is whether Bing volume for your specific keywords is large enough to be worth the setup. For some accounts it delivers real incremental revenue; for others it produces a handful of clicks a week and is not worth the attention. I would rather tell you to stay on Google than have you dilute a working account chasing a channel that is too small for your niche.

Bottom line: Google Ads is the engine, Microsoft Ads is the bolt on. Start with Google, get it profitable, then import your best campaigns into Bing to pick up cheaper clicks and a wealthier, more B2B leaning audience Google cannot reach. If you want a second opinion on whether Bing is worth adding to your account, or on the Google side that has to work first, my audit is free.