Microsoft Ads Conversion Benchmarks for B2B: Conversion Rate by Industry

If you’re looking for Microsoft Ads conversion benchmarks, you’re probably trying to answer one deceptively hard question:

“Is my conversion rate actually good… or am I just emotionally attached to it?”

The catch: conversion rate is only a meaningful benchmark when you’re comparing like-for-like, same industry, similar intent, similar conversion action (demo vs ebook), and a similar traffic mix (desktop vs mobile, brand vs non-brand, etc.).

The headline benchmark: average Microsoft/Bing conversion rate (all industries)

WordStream’s Bing benchmarks cite an average conversion rate on Bing across all industries of 2.94%.

That’s a useful sanity check. But in B2B, the “all industries” average is about as helpful as “the average shoe size”.

So let’s get specific.

Microsoft Ads conversion rate benchmarks by industry (including B2B-relevant categories)

WordStream provides Bing Ads conversion rate benchmarks by industry, including several categories that commonly map to B2B.

Here are the most B2B-relevant ones from that table:

• B2B Services: 2.64%
• Technology: 2.04%
• Finance & Insurance: 5.57%
• Legal Services: 3.58%
• Real Estate: 5.13%
• Careers & Employment: 6.81%
• Home Services: 3.36% *(often B2C-heavy, but still useful if you’re in local/lead gen)

Source: Wordstream*

How to interpret these without lying to yourself

These benchmarks can be directionally helpful, but they’ll swing based on:

• What counts as a conversion (demo request vs newsletter signup)
• How much of your traffic is branded
• Device mix (Microsoft tends to skew more desktop than other channels)
• Lead quality gates (short form vs multi-step qualification)
• Sales cycle length (enterprise buyers rarely convert like eCom)

So treat them as:

✅ “Are we in the right ballpark?”

Not:

❌ “If we’re below 5.13%, the campaign is bad.”

A benchmark you should care about in B2B: desktop vs mobile conversion rate

Microsoft Advertising cites that conversion rates on desktop are 52% higher than mobile.

In B2B, this matters a lot because:

• Desktop users are often in “work mode” (researching vendors, comparing, filling forms)
• Many B2B forms and workflows are simply easier on desktop
• Stakeholders often click once on mobile, convert later on desktop (which can distort platform-attributed CVR)

Actionable implication:

When you benchmark Microsoft Ads conversion rate, segment by device first. Otherwise you can “improve CVR” just by accidentally shifting spend to desktop, and think you’ve discovered marketing enlightenment.

What Microsoft says about improving conversion rate: audience targeting impact

Microsoft Advertising states that using any type of audience targeting results in a 50% higher conversion rate on average.

That’s not an industry benchmark, but it’s a useful performance expectation you can test against.

In practice, this typically shows up when you:

• Layer audiences to tighten relevance (especially in saturated auctions)
• Use LinkedIn profile targeting (where available) to improve buyer-fit
• Use remarketing lists segmented by intent (e.g., high-intent page visitors)

Critical note: “50% higher” is an average claim and your results will vary. But it’s a strong signal that Microsoft expects audience layers to be a major lever, which matches what many B2B accounts see in the wild.

What a “good” Microsoft Ads conversion rate looks like for B2B (a grounded framework)

Because we only have industry conversion benchmarks (not “B2B SaaS demo request benchmarks”), the most honest way to set targets is a three-tier range using the B2B Services / Technology baselines as your anchor:

1) If you’re running true bottom-funnel (demo/contact) campaigns

• Being around ~2%–3% on non-brand search can be perfectly healthy in many B2B categories, especially if you’re strict on lead quality.
• Compare against B2B Services (2.64%) and Technology (2.04%) as broad anchors.

2) If your “conversion” is softer (content download, webinar signup)

• Expect higher CVR than demo/contact pages, sometimes meaningfully higher.
• Your job is to stop the platform from optimising towards easy conversions that sales ignores.

3) If you’re running brand-heavy or competitor-heavy campaigns

• Brand campaigns often inflate CVR.
• Competitor campaigns often depress CVR (but can still be profitable if you measure assisted conversions / pipeline influence properly).

The biggest benchmarking mistake: mixing conversion actions

Before you compare yourself to any benchmark, sanity-check your own definition.

Microsoft’s reporting docs define conversion rate plainly: conversions ÷ clicks x 100.

That’s clean. The messy bit is: what counts as a conversion in your account?

If you’re counting:

• “Visited pricing page”
• “Scrolled 75%”
• “Downloaded a PDF”

…your CVR will look amazing and your pipeline will look… spiritually complex.

Benchmarking rule:

Benchmark demo requests against demo requests.

Benchmark lead forms against lead forms.

Don’t compare “any tracked action” to “a high-intent enquiry”.

Using Microsoft Ads benchmarks properly in competitive B2B markets

Here’s a sensible way to operationalise the benchmarks above without turning your reporting into fan fiction.

Step 1: Segment your CVR reporting

At minimum:

• Brand vs non-brand
• Device (desktop vs mobile)
• Campaign type (Search vs Audience Network/PMax equivalents)
• Conversion action (demo vs content vs calls)

Step 2: Compare to the most relevant industry anchor

Use WordStream’s Bing conversion rates as your category anchor:

• B2B Services (2.64%) is a decent proxy for many lead-gen service categories.
• Technology (2.04%) can be a decent proxy for software.

Step 3: Use Microsoft’s “uplift” stats as testing hypotheses

Two high-value hypotheses to test:

• Adding audience layers should improve CVR (Microsoft claims +50% on average).
• Desktop should materially outperform mobile (Microsoft cites +52%).

If you’re not seeing anything like this, it doesn’t mean the stats are wrong — it usually means:

• the audience layers are too broad,
• conversion tracking is noisy,
• or the landing page is doing a conversion-killing interpretive dance.

A concrete B2B example of Microsoft + LinkedIn targeting impact (case study data)

Microsoft Advertising published a Refinitiv case study (PDF) stating:

• +533% increase in conversions
• +51% more efficient cost-per-lead
• …using the Microsoft Audience Network with LinkedIn Profile targeting.

Case studies aren’t universal benchmarks (they’re often best-case scenarios), but they’re still valuable as proof of what’s directionally possible with tighter professional targeting in B2B.

What can make your Microsoft Ads conversion rate “look bad” (even if performance is fine)

This is where critical thinking matters more than benchmarks:

• Longer buying cycles: Microsoft Ads might assist conversions that get credited elsewhere.
• Offline conversions: if you’re not importing CRM outcomes, the platform learns from weaker signals.
• Smaller volume: some accounts have fewer clicks, so CVR swings more week-to-week.
• Lead quality filters: adding qualification steps can lower CVR but improve CAC/payback (often worth it).

In other words: a lower CVR isn’t automatically a problem. A lower CVR plus rising CPL plus poor lead quality is the problem.

Quick benchmark recap (the numbers worth pinning)

From sources you can verify:

• Avg Bing CVR (all industries): 2.94%
• B2B Services CVR: 2.64%
• Technology CVR: 2.04%
• Desktop CVR is 52% higher than mobile (Microsoft claim)
• Audience targeting yields 50% higher CVR on average (Microsoft claim)
• Refinitiv case study: +533% conversions, +51% more efficient CPL

‍

For help with Microsoft Ads management and building a scalable strategy using this often underrated chanel, request your free proposal from Lever Digital today.

‍