There's a conversation I've had versions of for the better part of a decade. A client presents their paid search strategy. It's entirely Google Ads. I ask about Microsoft Ads. The answer is usually some variation of: "We tried it a few years ago. The volume wasn't there."
That answer was never quite right, and in 2026 it's actively misleading.
The audience Microsoft reaches
Bing powers search on every Windows device by default, which means it disproportionately reaches older, higher-income, and professionally employed users. If you're selling B2B services, financial products, home improvement, automotive, or anything with a higher price point, that demographic skew is directly commercially relevant.
It also powers search within Microsoft 365, used by the majority of UK businesses. Those are people at work, making purchasing decisions, and searching with professional intent.
The CPC advantage is real
Because the majority of paid search budgets concentrate on Google, competition on Microsoft Ads remains structurally lower across most categories. CPCs are often 30-50% below equivalent Google terms. For some sectors - legal, financial, B2B software - the gap is even wider.
The question isn't which platform gets more volume. It's which platform gets the best return on marginal spend. Once Google campaigns are well-optimised, the incremental ROAS from adding Microsoft Ads is often better than increasing Google budgets further.
The practical case for testing it now
Microsoft Ads imports directly from Google Ads. Setup time for an existing account is hours, not weeks. My recommendation: import your top-performing Google campaigns, set conservative daily budgets, and run for 60-90 days before drawing conclusions. The data is almost always more positive than the scepticism that preceded it.