Head to head · the big one
Google Ads vs Facebook Ads
By Oliver Wakefield-Smith, Digital Signet. Updated October 2026.
Facebook sells cheaper clicks; Google sells warmer ones. Neither fact settles anything until you price a lead on each, so this page runs the same budget through both sets of measured benchmarks.
The same $500, twice
USD to match the datasets; both LocaliQ sets are 2026 data; the search figure pools Google Ads and Microsoft Ads campaigns. Lead-gen objective on the Facebook side, since leads are the point.
Search ads · 2026 averages
Facebook lead gen · 2026 averages
Sources: LocaliQ, 2026 data LocaliQ, 2026 data. On the measured cost-per-lead lines, Facebook's $27.39 beats search's $66.69, and that is the strongest honest argument for social lead gen. The counterweight does not show in either table: lead quality. A search lead asked for you; a form lead was offered a form.
Why cheaper clicks are not cheaper customers
The CVR bridge only reaches the enquiry. Close rates differ downstream: search leads convert to paying work at materially higher rates in most service businesses because the intent was self-declared. Measure cost per booked job, not cost per lead, before declaring a winner; the chain is on clicks to customers.
Which to run first
A local service with searchable demand (plumber, dentist, tutor) funds Google first: demand capture beats demand creation while budgets are small. A business selling something nobody searches for yet, or selling on look (food, fitness, retail), tests Facebook first. Run the numbers for your own industry on the benchmark board and in the calculator.