Microsoft Ads vs Google Ads: Which Platform Delivers Better Results for B2B?

Microsoft Ads and Google Ads are often compared by B2B marketers looking to maximise return on ad spend. While Google has the lion’s share of market attention, Microsoft Ads offers powerful advantages, especially for businesses targeting senior decision-makers across the UK and beyond. Choosing the right platform depends on your goals, budget and audience. Google Ads remains the dominant player, but Microsoft Ads has carved out a strong position through its integration with LinkedIn, lower cost-per-clicks and a more commercially focused user base. For many B2B organisations, the most effective strategy might not be choosing one over the other, but understanding how each platform can contribute to your overall digital advertising mix.

This guide will cover:

Platform Reach and Audience Differences

Choosing between Microsoft Ads and Google Ads starts with understanding where your audience spends their time. While Google commands a dominant share of global search traffic, Microsoft Ads provides access to a commercially focused segment of users who are often overlooked. For B2B marketers, this difference in platform reach can have a significant impact on campaign outcomes, cost-efficiency and lead quality. Microsoft Ads typically performs better on desktop, particularly during working hours, and integrates directly with platforms used in professional settings. Google Ads, on the other hand, excels in scale and breadth, capturing both consumer and business traffic across mobile and desktop devices. The key is to align your platform choice with your audience’s behaviour, intent and buying cycle. In this section, we’ll explore how each platform differs in terms of user base, search patterns and behavioural trends — and why those distinctions matter for businesses focused on generating qualified B2B leads.

Search Market Share and User Intent

Google Ads operates on a global scale, with more than 90% of the search market share in most regions. Microsoft Ads, which includes Bing, Yahoo and AOL, holds between 5–10% in the UK depending on device and location. At first glance, this may seem like a disadvantage, but the smaller share hides a more focused and commercially active user base. Microsoft Ads users are typically older, wealthier and more likely to be in a professional role. Many use Bing as their default search engine via Microsoft Edge in corporate environments. In contrast, Google users span a broader demographic and include more casual or consumer-driven intent. For B2B marketers, this means Microsoft Ads may deliver lower traffic volumes, but with a higher probability of quality leads. Google Ads provides scale, while Microsoft Ads offers specificity. Each has its role in a well-balanced paid media strategy depending on your industry and campaign goals.

Desktop vs Mobile Use Patterns

Microsoft Ads continues to see most of its activity on desktop devices, particularly during weekday working hours. This makes it a strong fit for B2B campaigns, where key decision-makers are browsing from office computers rather than smartphones. Desktop usage tends to indicate greater intent to research, engage or convert — especially in sectors like finance, software or healthcare where buying decisions are more complex. Google Ads, in contrast, dominates on mobile. It offers exceptional visibility across devices, capturing users throughout the day, including evenings and weekends. While this reach can drive volume, mobile conversions in B2B are often lower due to form friction or timing. For businesses targeting working professionals during business hours, Microsoft Ads may deliver a better return on investment through more deliberate desktop-based interactions. For wider brand awareness and top-of-funnel activity, Google’s mobile strength can support broader campaign goals effectively.

Audience Demographics for B2B Targeting

Microsoft’s user base is heavily influenced by professional demographics. The integration with Microsoft Office, Windows and enterprise tools like Teams and Outlook positions Bing as the default environment for many business users. These users often include senior roles in technology, finance, healthcare and public services. By contrast, Google’s audience spans all age groups, income levels and industries, from students and jobseekers to CEOs. This gives Google wider coverage but makes it harder to isolate high-value segments without detailed audience setup. For B2B advertisers looking to target decision-makers, Microsoft’s alignment with a more commercially focused audience creates opportunities to connect with people during their workday, on work devices and in work-related contexts. That alignment often translates into better lead quality, even if volume is lower. The deeper your understanding of your target market, the more you can use each platform’s demographic profile to your advantage.

Browser and Ecosystem Influence

Microsoft Ads benefits from tight integration with the broader Microsoft ecosystem. Many users access Bing search directly from Microsoft Edge or Internet Explorer, particularly in IT-managed environments where Chrome is not the default browser. These users also interact regularly with LinkedIn, Outlook and Office365, forming part of a digitally connected professional environment. Google’s ecosystem is equally powerful but serves different user behaviours. Chrome, Gmail, YouTube and Google Workspace dominate consumer and enterprise tools, but the blend of personal and professional usage makes ad targeting more complex. For B2B advertisers, Microsoft’s ecosystem often leads to more consistent exposure across business-related platforms. Your ads are more likely to be seen during research sessions, email checks or document editing on employer-issued devices. Understanding where your audience operates online is crucial to placing ads in the right context and at the right time. The environment shapes the intent behind each click.

User Behaviour and Conversion Cycles

B2B marketing rarely delivers instant conversions. Sales cycles are longer, often involving multiple stakeholders, research phases and offline conversations. Microsoft Ads fits naturally into this pattern. Its users tend to spend more time researching, reading content and engaging with detailed service pages. Clicks are fewer, but they often come from users further along in their journey. Google Ads, on the other hand, can support rapid acquisition in high-intent scenarios, especially for bottom-of-funnel keywords. However, its sheer scale means it also attracts more noise — users who are browsing casually or comparing options without strong buying signals. For B2B campaigns, Microsoft Ads can play a key role in nurturing high-value leads who need more time and information before converting. When combined with remarketing and tailored messaging, it supports a more deliberate, relationship-driven marketing approach, which is often essential for B2B success.

Targeting Options and B2B Alignment

When it comes to B2B campaigns, targeting is everything. Reaching the right people in the right roles at the right time is what separates high-performing accounts from wasted budget. Both Microsoft Ads and Google Ads offer advanced targeting tools, but the way they approach audience segmentation is notably different. Microsoft’s tight integration with LinkedIn allows advertisers to target by job title, company, industry and more. This kind of precision can be incredibly valuable when dealing with longer sales cycles and higher-value decision-makers. Google Ads relies more heavily on behavioural data and search intent. It offers powerful tools such as custom audiences and affinity groups, but doesn’t provide the same level of professional segmentation. This section breaks down how both platforms handle targeting and why Microsoft Ads might be the better fit for B2B marketing strategies built on account-based thinking and qualified audience reach.

Job Title and Company-Based Targeting

Microsoft Ads stands out in B2B targeting due to its integration with LinkedIn. Advertisers can target users based on job title, company name, industry, company size and seniority level. This level of professional segmentation is unmatched by Google Ads. For B2B campaigns that rely on reaching decision-makers, this feature is a game-changer. You can tailor messaging and budget to specific roles, such as Heads of Procurement in the healthcare sector or Marketing Directors at mid-sized tech firms. This reduces wasted spend and increases the chances of generating qualified leads. While this targeting is limited to Microsoft’s Audience Network and not Search, it still plays a significant role in full-funnel strategies.

Search Intent and Keyword Matching

Google Ads leads in capturing active search intent. Its advanced keyword matching tools, including exact match, phrase match and broad match modifiers, allow advertisers to align campaigns closely with user queries. For B2B, this means appearing at the exact moment someone searches for services, products or solutions. Microsoft Ads also uses keyword matching, and performance is often stronger in commercial niches. However, its reach is smaller, and some advertisers find that traffic volume on long-tail B2B keywords is limited. The benefit is that lower competition can lead to better cost efficiency and more focused traffic, but it may not scale as easily as Google.

Audience Segments and Remarketing

Both platforms offer robust audience targeting options beyond keywords. Google Ads allows for detailed remarketing using website behaviour, app usage and YouTube engagement. It also supports custom audiences based on interests, purchase intent and competitor sites. Microsoft Ads mirrors many of these features, offering custom audiences and remarketing lists, including LinkedIn profile-based segmentation. While Google provides broader reach, Microsoft’s strength lies in remarketing with professional intent. For B2B, combining both platforms can be effective — using Google for discovery and scale, and Microsoft to reinforce messaging with high-value targets already in your CRM or sales funnel.

Geographic and Demographic Filters

Geotargeting is strong on both platforms. Google Ads allows country, region, city and postcode-level targeting with options to include or exclude based on presence or interest. Microsoft Ads offers similar controls, with additional filtering through LinkedIn demographics. For B2B campaigns focused on key business hubs — such as London, Bristol or Exeter — Microsoft’s tighter demographic control can help focus spend on audiences that matter. Age and gender filters exist on both platforms, but are rarely used in B2B. What makes Microsoft more appealing here is its ability to overlay professional data onto location targeting, refining ad delivery for better campaign precision.

Account-Based Marketing Opportunities

Account-based marketing (ABM) is growing in popularity across B2B sectors. Microsoft Ads supports ABM strategies more directly than Google Ads, thanks to its ability to target by company name and role. You can build campaigns that speak directly to buyers at specific organisations — ideal for long sales cycles and enterprise deals. Google does offer similar intent modelling through custom audiences, but it relies heavily on browsing behaviour and lacks the direct professional overlay. For B2B marketers using ABM platforms or sales teams working with defined account lists, Microsoft Ads offers a more natural fit for aligning ad spend with high-value business opportunities.

Cost and Performance Metrics

When evaluating Microsoft Ads vs Google Ads for B2B, cost-efficiency and performance are central to the decision-making process. It’s not just about reach or targeting — it’s about what you get for your spend and how that spend translates into qualified leads. Many advertisers default to Google Ads because of its scale, but Microsoft Ads consistently delivers competitive advantages in cost-per-click and return on ad spend, particularly in B2B sectors. The challenge with performance comparisons lies in how differently the platforms behave. Google may deliver higher volumes, but that doesn’t always translate to better results if those clicks are unqualified. Microsoft Ads, although smaller, often brings more commercially focused users who are ready to engage. This section explores how costs compare, how conversions behave across each platform and why B2B marketers should consider the total value of each click, not just the volume.

Cost-per-Click Comparison

One of the most compelling reasons to use Microsoft Ads in B2B campaigns is cost-per-click. Across most industries, Microsoft Ads offers significantly lower CPCs than Google Ads, often by 30% or more. In sectors like legal, software, finance and healthcare — where Google Ads CPCs can be prohibitively high — Microsoft provides an affordable alternative without sacrificing commercial intent. This difference is largely driven by lower competition. Fewer advertisers bid on Microsoft, which keeps costs down. While this comes with reduced traffic volume, it also means your budget stretches further. For companies operating with tight margins or testing new B2B strategies, Microsoft Ads can deliver more impressions and more clicks per pound. Lower CPCs also make it easier to experiment, refine targeting and improve creative performance before scaling to broader platforms like Google.

Clickthrough Rate and Ad Engagement

Clickthrough rate (CTR) is often seen as a sign of ad relevance, but it varies depending on platform dynamics. Google Ads typically achieves higher CTRs due to its massive reach and user familiarity. It’s the default search engine for most users, so ads appear more frequently and generate more clicks. Microsoft Ads usually shows lower CTRs, but this isn’t always a negative. Lower CTRs may simply reflect a more discerning audience — users who are researching and comparing providers before committing. In B2B, this can lead to better engagement downstream, with users spending more time on site or engaging with gated content. What matters most is how many of those clicks result in meaningful actions. Don’t dismiss Microsoft’s lower CTRs without looking at lead quality and cost per conversion. In many B2B cases, a smaller number of more serious visitors is a better outcome.

Conversion Rates and Lead Quality

Conversion rates on Microsoft Ads often match or exceed those of Google Ads in B2B campaigns. This may surprise marketers who equate volume with performance. But the professional context of Microsoft users tends to drive stronger engagement and action once on site. Users clicking ads on Bing or Edge are often doing so from a work computer during business hours. They’re likely conducting research for their team, preparing to contact suppliers or evaluating service options — all of which signal readiness to convert. Google Ads can deliver faster clicks but with mixed intent, especially on broad match keywords. For lead generation, Microsoft Ads may generate fewer conversions overall but at a higher quality per lead. This is where integration with CRM data becomes crucial — you want to track not just quantity but revenue contribution over time.

Return on Ad Spend (ROAS)

Return on ad spend is one of the clearest indicators of campaign effectiveness. While Google Ads has the potential for high returns due to its scale and versatility, Microsoft Ads often delivers stronger ROAS in B2B niches. Lower CPCs and higher-quality leads mean each conversion costs less and delivers more downstream value. For service-based businesses, ROAS is influenced by customer lifetime value, average deal size and repeat engagement. If your typical B2B client generates significant revenue over time, acquiring them more affordably through Microsoft can dramatically improve ROI. Many Priority Pixels clients see stronger ROAS on Microsoft Ads for lead generation campaigns compared to Google Ads, even with a smaller overall budget. This doesn’t mean one should replace the other — it means Microsoft deserves a dedicated role in a diversified PPC strategy focused on returns, not just traffic.

Budget Allocation and Scalability

Budget planning across the two platforms requires a realistic view of scale and performance. Google Ads is ideal for larger budgets seeking volume, broad reach and multiple campaign formats. It supports video, shopping, display and app promotion on a massive scale. Microsoft Ads, while more limited in inventory, is often more efficient with smaller budgets. For B2B marketers, a dual-platform approach often works best. Start with Microsoft to test messaging, optimise targeting and validate audiences. Then scale proven campaigns to Google once cost-efficiency is established. This avoids burning budget on unqualified clicks and ensures each platform is used for its strengths. Budget should follow performance. If Microsoft consistently delivers better leads for less, allocate accordingly. If Google drives more volume for a successful offer, scale it. Smart B2B advertisers look beyond brand names and focus on outcomes. Flexibility is key to maximising return across platforms.

Strategic Recommendations for B2B Marketers

Choosing between Microsoft Ads and Google Ads isn’t always a matter of either-or. For most B2B marketers, the most effective strategy is built around combining the strengths of both platforms. Google provides reach, scale and a vast toolkit for intent-based advertising. Microsoft offers targeting precision, commercial context and cost-efficiency. By understanding what each platform does best, you can build a campaign strategy that prioritises quality over quantity, and long-term value over short-term metrics. In this section, we’ll explore practical steps for structuring campaigns, allocating budgets, and aligning messaging with platform behaviour. These insights are based on Priority Pixels’ experience working with a range of B2B clients across tech, healthcare and professional services. Whether you’re launching a new paid strategy or refining an existing one, these recommendations are designed to help you drive measurable outcomes in a way that supports your wider business objectives.

Run Platform-Specific Campaigns

Avoid duplicating campaigns across platforms without adapting to their strengths. Instead, run campaigns tailored to the intent and behaviour found on each. Use Google Ads for high-volume, short-tail keywords that signal immediate interest. Prioritise campaigns that benefit from broader reach, such as brand awareness or competitor bidding. For Microsoft Ads, focus on campaigns where intent and context matter more than volume — such as lead generation for niche services or remarketing to mid-funnel audiences. Develop messaging that speaks to business users during working hours. Consider Microsoft’s desktop-first environment when designing landing pages. By running platform-specific campaigns rather than clones, you create a more efficient advertising system that respects the differences in user behaviour and buying signals.

Use Microsoft Ads for Account-Based Campaigns

Account-based marketing (ABM) is essential for B2B brands targeting a defined list of high-value clients. Microsoft Ads is particularly suited to this approach due to its LinkedIn targeting capabilities. You can reach people by job title, company, seniority and industry — perfect for aligning with your ABM list. Run targeted display campaigns on the Microsoft Audience Network to raise awareness among key accounts before following up with more direct search activity. Unlike broader Google targeting, this allows you to focus your spend precisely where it counts. When paired with a personalised landing page or call to action, these campaigns can deliver significant engagement at a lower cost. For B2B marketers already running ABM through platforms like HubSpot or Salesforce, Microsoft Ads can be the ideal paid channel for strategic amplification.

Test Messaging with Microsoft Before Scaling on Google

Google Ads campaigns can burn through budget quickly, especially in competitive B2B sectors. Before committing large sums, use Microsoft Ads as a proving ground for messaging, creative and keyword strategy. Lower CPCs make testing more cost-effective, and performance data is more reliable when your audience is already filtered by commercial context. Test different headline structures, value propositions and CTAs across a variety of campaigns. Analyse bounce rates, time on site and conversion rates to identify what resonates. Once you’ve identified winning combinations, scale them across Google with confidence. This not only saves money but reduces the risk of running underperforming creative in a high-cost environment. Microsoft’s role as a testing ground is a practical and underutilised tactic in B2B paid media.

Integrate Paid Search with CRM and Sales Data

B2B conversions don’t stop at the form fill. The true value of a campaign lies in how many leads progress through your pipeline and ultimately become customers. To measure this accurately, integrate your Microsoft and Google Ads campaigns with your CRM. Use UTM tracking to link ad clicks with leads in tools like HubSpot or Salesforce. Monitor sales cycle length, revenue attribution and average deal size by channel. You may find that Microsoft Ads delivers fewer leads but a higher percentage of qualified opportunities. Or that Google drives more volume but requires more filtering. This kind of insight is essential for budget allocation. It moves you away from vanity metrics like CTR and toward real business outcomes. If your sales process is complex, this integration becomes even more important for refining your targeting and proving ROI.

Build a Balanced Cross-Platform Strategy

The most successful B2B paid strategies use both Microsoft and Google Ads, each for specific roles in the funnel. Start by defining your objectives: lead generation, remarketing, brand awareness or account targeting. Then allocate each platform accordingly. Use Google for reach, discovery and high-volume search. Use Microsoft for refinement, efficiency and B2B decision-maker targeting. Avoid spreading budgets too thin — assign spend based on expected return, not just platform popularity. Monitor cross-platform performance monthly, not just in isolation. Compare cost per qualified lead, sales conversion rates and customer lifetime value. Over time, you’ll build a data-driven understanding of how each channel contributes. This balanced approach gives you strategic flexibility and reduces dependency on a single traffic source. In a B2B environment where intent and timing matter, a cross-platform mix can make the difference between steady leads and wasted spend.