Google leans mobile. Microsoft leans desktop. As revised target ROAS behaviour pushes Google CPCs up and leaves budgets unspent, more advertisers are moving a slice of spend to Microsoft — and finding cheaper desktop conversions waiting there.
The two networks are no longer interchangeable. Google's inventory skews heavily mobile and its automated bidding now prices auctions more aggressively against your target ROAS, which is why so many accounts report rising CPCs alongside daily budgets that never fully spend. Microsoft Advertising skews desktop and B2B, carries a thinner auction, and in most categories clears at a lower cost per click — with the trade-off of far less volume. The right answer for almost every advertiser is not one or the other, it is a deliberate split with different targets on each.
A target ROAS that the auction cannot fill is not efficiency. It is a budget that quietly stopped competing.
— Arise GEO, Google Ads vs Microsoft Ads
Google buys you reach. Microsoft buys you desktop margin. Advertisers who split deliberately outperform advertisers who pick a side.
— Arise GEO, Google Ads vs Microsoft Ads
Revised target ROAS behaviour means the bid model declines a larger share of auctions when your target implies a max CPC below the clearing price. Impression share slips first, then spend, then revenue. Model the ceiling before you set the target with our free target ROAS calculator.
Device mix changes everything downstream: form length, landing page layout, checkout friction, and the conversion rate you should expect. We rebuild the landing experience per network rather than sending both to the same page.
An imported Google campaign inherits targets, negatives, and bid strategies tuned for a different auction. We rebuild match types, negatives, and targets for Microsoft's thinner query pool.
Blended reporting with margin applied, so budget moves between networks based on contribution profit rather than platform-reported ROAS.
We can promise this because our methodology already works. Hundreds of pages now sit in position #1 across our clients' catalogs. The risk shouldn't be on you — it's on us.
In most categories the cost per click clears lower because fewer advertisers compete in the auction. Cost per acquisition depends on your conversion rate on desktop traffic, which is often higher for B2B and considered purchases and lower for impulse ecommerce. Test with a controlled budget before you draw conclusions.
Because the target implies a max CPC below the auction's clearing price. The bid strategy declines auctions rather than overpaying, so impression share and spend both fall. Our free target ROAS calculator shows the max CPC your target implies against the CPC you currently pay.
Start at 10–20% of Google spend for a 60-day read, weighted toward your desktop-converting campaigns. Scale on contribution profit, not platform ROAS, and accept that the volume ceiling arrives faster than on Google.
Import the structure, then rebuild. Targets, negatives, and match types tuned for Google's auction routinely misfire on Microsoft's thinner query pool, and imported bid strategies start with no conversion history to learn from.
Indirectly. Microsoft's network feeds Bing and Copilot surfaces, so presence there puts your brand and product data in front of an AI answer layer that Google's ad network does not touch. It is not a substitute for GEO work, but it is adjacent to it.
Three layers, in order. First, entity clarity: one canonical Organization with @id anchors, sameAs links to authoritative databases, and knowsAbout coverage of your real expertise. Second, extractable content: atomic answer blocks, comparison tables, transparent pricing and specs, and FAQ blocks on every commercial page. Third, corroboration: mentions in the roundups, directories, review platforms, and trade publications those engines retrieve. Measure it by probing a fixed set of buying questions monthly and tracking citation frequency per engine.
Citability. AI engines lift passages that answer one question completely in 40–80 words, in plain language, with a concrete number, definition, or list. Pages that bury the answer under narrative rarely get quoted. We rewrite key pages so every important question has a self-contained answer block, wrapped in schema that labels what it is.
Yes, because AI answers are built from indexed pages. Every major assistant retrieves from a crawled index, so pages that aren't crawlable, renderable, or structured never enter the candidate pool. Classic SEO is now the entry requirement for AI visibility, and the two programs share almost all of the same work.
Technical recovery and on-page work typically show movement in 30–60 days. AI citation lift on long-tail and comparison queries usually lands in 30–90 days. Category-level authority and head-term rankings are a 6–12 month curve. Every engagement ships a sequenced 90-day plan so early wins fund the long work.
You get a forensic audit, a prioritized 90-day execution plan with effort and impact scoring, and optional done-for-you implementation by our engineers and editors. Pricing is scoped per engagement based on catalog size, locale count, and whether you want execution included. Implement our 90-day plan and if you don't see results in 3–6 months, we refund you in full.
Audits scoped within 24 hours. Results within 90 days, or your money back.
Request Your Audit →