Paid ads
Google Ads vs Facebook Ads: which should you actually run?
Published May 31, 2026 · 5 min read
Quick rule before the explanation. Do people already type what you sell into Google? Start there. They do not? Start on Meta. That one question settles it more often than any feature comparison. Here is why, and what it costs to get it wrong.
Google captures demand. Meta creates it.
On Google, the want already exists. Someone types "emergency plumber near me," you show up, they call. On Meta (Facebook and Instagram), nobody is looking for you. You have to create the want, which means the ad has to be good enough to make a stranger care. So the real question is not which platform is better. It is whether demand for what you sell already exists, or you have to manufacture it.
When Google wins. Trades, dental, legal, emergency work, "near me," anything urgent or researched. The clicks cost more, but the person is closer to buying, so the math usually still works.
When Meta wins. Discovery and impulse. Visual products, new categories, offers people did not know they wanted. Clicks are usually cheaper and the volume higher, but the creative and the offer carry the campaign. A boring ad dies on Meta.
| Google Ads | Facebook / Meta Ads | |
|---|---|---|
| Buyer mindset | Actively searching | Scrolling, not searching |
| Your job | Show up and convert | Create the want from scratch |
| Cost per click | Usually higher | Usually lower |
| Best for | Demand that exists (trades, local, urgent) | Demand you create (visual, impulse, new) |
| Creative load | Lower | Higher (the ad is the campaign) |
| Speed to first result | Fast, the intent is there | Slower, needs testing |
The budget mistake that kills small campaigns
You only learn this by spending. Meta needs roughly 50 conversions a week per ad set to climb out of its learning phase and stop wasting your money. Google needs enough clicks to find the searches that actually convert. Split a small budget across both on day one and neither one ever gets there. You pay for two campaigns that both stay dumb. Pick the one that fits the rule up top, fund it until it is profitable, then add the other. One channel working beats two channels guessing.
The part that matters more than the platform
The platform is rarely the real problem. The offer and the tracking are. A weak offer just loses money faster on either one. And if you cannot see what each dollar brings back, you are gambling. Proper conversion tracking is not a magic fix after the iOS privacy changes, but the gap between measuring and guessing is the gap between scaling and hoping.
How we run it. We manage Google and Meta for clients and for our own brands, with tracking wired to the number that matters: cost per booked job, not cost per click. We started both on our own money, before we ever charged anyone for it.
Want your ads run to the right number?
We plan, launch, and manage Google and Meta, tied to booked jobs and not clicks.
Common questions
Is Google or Facebook cheaper?+
Meta clicks are usually cheaper. Cheaper clicks are not cheaper customers. Judge both by cost per booked job.
How much do I need to start?+
Enough for one channel to gather real data. On Meta that means enough to clear roughly 50 conversions a week. A budget too thin to do that learns nothing.
Which is better for a local service business?+
Usually Google first. The search intent is already there and ready to convert.