Bing vs Google: how much traffic does Bing send small sites?

Between one search click in ten and one in eight on our benchmark sites. Over the 90 days from 7 July 2026 to 4 October 2026, Bing’s share of Google plus Bing clicks ranged from 2.7% to 17.5% across seven sites, with a median of 13.0%. Five of the seven sat between 9.7% and 15.1%.

We lead with the median across sites because the sites differ a lot in size: the largest one accounts for 82% of all the clicks. Adding every click together gives 14.7%, and 13.2% once that site is left out, so its size is not what sets the figure.

The low outlier is a testimonial collection tool at 2.7%. Bing has only reported data for it for 116 days, and its interval runs from 0% to 8%. Newer Bing properties in this sample tended to sit lower, which matters when you read your own number.

How firm is 13.0%?

Less firm than one number suggests, so here are three ways of cutting the same data. A share has a Google half, and when Google clicks fall, Bing’s share rises without Bing doing anything. Three of the seven sites were established before spring 2026, so we could compare their Google clicks per day in the window with March to May. The AI writing assistant was flat (+6%). The founder’s blog was down 50% and the LinkedIn content SaaS down 44%.

On the blog the Google decline made little difference, because its Bing clicks fell 44% as well: Bing’s share was 15.8% in spring and 17.5% in the window. On the LinkedIn content SaaS it mattered. Bing clicks rose 115% while Google’s fell, and the share went from 4.4% to 15.1%. Had its Google clicks held at their spring level, its share would have been 9.1%.

So read the result as a range: 10% to 13%. We kept both sites in the benchmark because losing half is a different thing from the site-wide collapses described below, and because every site’s Google traffic moves. The CSV has the Google change for each established site so you can make your own call.

Our sites got more from Bing than the worldwide market share suggests, and about what the desktop share suggests. Statcounter is the usual source for search engine market share. Its July to September 2026 averages put Bing at 4.8% of search referrals worldwide, 10.8% on desktop worldwide and 14.6% on desktop in the United States. On phones Bing barely registers at 0.6%.

Statcounter measures the same kind of thing we do, which makes the comparison fair:

Two things explain why small software sites land near the desktop line. First, their visitors are at a desk: a median 64% of these sites’ Google clicks came from desktop. Second, Bing is the default search engine in Windows and Microsoft Edge, which is where a lot of office browsing happens.

For a wider sample, SE Ranking studied 13,700 websites and found Google sending 94.8% of organic search traffic and Bing 3.51%, as reported by Digital Information World. That sample covers every kind of site, including mobile-first consumer ones, so it sits near Statcounter’s all-device number. Ours is the desktop-heavy end of the same picture.

Statcounter’s numbers, month by month

We used three-month averages because September 2026 jumps by about six points on desktop in a single month. We cannot explain the jump from behaviour on our own sites, so here is every month.

Week to week it was stable. Pooled across the seven sites, Bing’s share stayed between 13.2% and 16.4% in every one of the 12 full weeks in the window. Pooled, Bing did a little better on weekdays (15.2%) than at weekends (12.8%), but only four of the seven sites showed that on their own, so we would not plan around it.

Over a longer stretch it moved more. Three of the sites have enough Bing history to plot by month. On the largest one, Bing’s share was under 6% for its first five full months in Bing Webmaster Tools and has been about 15% since July 2026. Both halves moved at once there: Bing clicks more than doubled and Google clicks fell by 44%.

The practical point: a Bing share is a moving ratio, and a property’s first months can understate what Bing will send later. Measured over each site’s whole Bing history (102 to 484 days), the median share was 9.7%, lower than the 13.0% of the last 90 days.

Often, yes. Of the 552 pages on the benchmark sites that earned at least one search click in the window, 14.9% got clicks only from Bing, 67.4% only from Google and 17.8% from both.

Looked at from Bing’s side, 45.6% of the pages Bing sent clicks to got no Google click at all, and those pages took 17.5% of Bing’s clicks. The two engines also disagree on which pages matter most: on each of the four larger sites, only 4 of the top 10 pages by Bing clicks were also in the top 10 by Google clicks.

This matches what we saw in our study of how long new articles take to rank, where Bing sent the only search clicks for 15 of the 320 articles we could track on both engines. If you only read Search Console, those pages look dead.

On paper, yes, and you should not read much into it. Bing’s reported click-through rate was higher than Google’s on six of seven sites, with a median ratio of 1.91 to 1. Pooled, it was 0.98% on Bing against 0.55% on Google.

The position columns give it away. Bing’s average position sat between 5.0 and 5.9 on every site. Google’s ran from 9.5 to 41.5. Google is logging a large number of impressions deep in the results that almost never get clicked, and those drag its click-through rate down. Bing’s report is dominated by impressions near the top. The two rates are not measuring the same set of impressions, so a higher Bing rate does not mean Bing searchers click more.

This was the most useful thing we found for day-to-day work. Add up the clicks in each console’s query report and compare with the property total: Bing Webmaster Tools attached a search query to 81% of clicks. Search Console attached one to 31%.

Google says why in its documentation:

Small sites live on rare, long queries, which is exactly what gets filtered. Bing’s query list is a smaller sample of your searchers, but you can read far more of it. Use it for keyword research: the phrases people type into Bing are a fair guide to the ones hidden from you in Google.

Analytics gave Bing a bigger share than the consoles did. For six of the benchmark sites we also had Google Analytics 4 session sources for 28 days to early October 2026. Bing’s share of Google plus Bing sessions was 19.4%. For the same sites and dates, its share of console clicks was 14.5%.

The two tools count different things. A console counts clicks on a search result. Analytics counts sessions it attributes to a source. On these sites analytics recorded 1.5 sessions for every Google click and 2.1 for every Bing click. We cannot tell from this data why the gap is wider for Bing. Other site owners report the same pattern, including Bing visits in analytics with no clicks in Bing’s own report. Bing’s report does count more than web results. Microsoft said in 2023 that it had “improved Bing web data by combining web and chat clicks and impressions”.

Bing’s reach is wider than bing.com

Analytics also shows the engines that draw on Bing’s index. DuckDuckGo says its results include traditional links and images “which we largely source from Bing”. Yahoo tells site owners the same thing:

In our analytics data DuckDuckGo and Yahoo together added about 30% on top of Bing’s own sessions. AI assistants added more: visits they referred were about 36% as many as Bing’s, and ChatGPT alone about 19%. Microsoft lists ChatGPT among the tools Bing powers, so work you do for Bing can pay off outside it.

One more number, with a caution. Sessions from Bing had a higher engagement rate than sessions from Google: 60% against 46%, and higher on all six sites. Three of those sites had fewer than five Bing sessions in the period, so treat it as a hint.

A share has two halves, and either one can move it. We examined 14 sites and kept seven in the benchmark. Four of the others are worth showing because their Bing share says something other than “how good is Bing for this site”.

Very high: Google has dropped you

Two of our sites, both outside the software niche, lost most of their Google traffic to site-wide ranking drops: Google clicks fell 83% on one and 99% on the other. In the window, Bing’s share of their search clicks was 96.8% and 99.3%. Bing kept sending clicks to both throughout, and sent more than before. The share moved that far because the Google half all but disappeared.

Both sites were already Bing-heavy before their drops, at 63.0% and 52.7%, so a high share alone proves nothing. A share that climbs quickly because Google clicks are falling is the signal to act on. If that is what you see, start with our guide to why Google rankings drop. We kept both sites out of the benchmark for this reason.

Very low: indexed by Bing, shown to nobody

The opposite case is easier to miss. An AI dictation app we run had up to 579 pages in Bing’s index and zero Bing impressions for 191 days in a row, from 19 March 2026. Google was showing the same pages every day. We raised it with Bing Webmaster support, and impressions began on 26 September 2026, the day the ticket was marked resolved. The first Bing clicks followed a week later. Over the window its Bing share was 1.0%, with 468 Google impressions for every Bing one.

A software review site shows the same shape and we do not yet know why: 207 to 487 pages in Bing’s index, about 91 Google impressions for every Bing one, and a Bing share of 1.5%. It also lost Google visibility in January 2026, a second reason it is not in the benchmark.

The lesson is that “indexed” and “served” are different states in Bing. If Bing Webmaster Tools reports pages in the index but Search Performance stays near zero for weeks while Google is busy, do not wait for it to fix itself. Check the Bing Webmaster Guidelines, then open a ticket with Bing Webmaster support.

Enter the clicks each console reports for the same dates. The checker gives your Bing share, a 95% range so a small sample is not over-read, and where that puts you against the seven benchmark sites.

It takes about five minutes by hand. Use the same dates in both consoles and a range of at least 28 days.

A regex for every search engine in GA4

To see all search engines in one view, add a filter on Session source with “matches regex” and paste this. It keeps Google, Bing, DuckDuckGo, Yahoo, Ecosia, Brave Search and Yandex, and leaves out look-alikes such as mail.google.com. We built it from the source names in our own properties.

A script that pulls both numbers

If you check more than one site, use the APIs. This script uses only Python’s standard library. It needs an OAuth access token for the Search Console API (the webmasters.readonly scope, which you can mint in Google’s OAuth Playground) and an API key from Bing Webmaster Tools (Settings, then API access; Microsoft’s guide). We ran it against one of the benchmark sites and it returned the same 15.1% shown in Figure 1.

Or ask for it across every site you run

Murkuz connects Google Search Console, GA4 and Bing Webmaster Tools to Claude or ChatGPT, so the comparison is one question, answered from your own rows for every connected site:

If the checker put you below the typical range, or you have never opened Bing Webmaster Tools, this is the whole job.

Data

Google Search Console property totals by day (web search, final data) through the Search Console API. Bing Webmaster Tools daily clicks and impressions, weekly page and query statistics and index counts through the Bing Webmaster API. Google Analytics 4 session sources for six sites. Statcounter Global Stats monthly figures for July, August and September 2026. All console and analytics data is from sites we own and run.

Sample

We examined 14 sites. Seven are in the benchmark: six software product sites and one founder’s personal blog. It is a small sample: fewer than 10,000 search clicks between them in the 90 days. We publish shares and ratios, not click or impression counts. The window is 7 July 2026 to 4 October 2026. Bing’s history for these sites runs from 102 to 484 days; the earliest Bing data we hold is from 8 June 2025.

Exclusions

A site had to have Bing data for all 90 days of the window, at least 50 combined clicks, and no site-wide collapse or suppression on either engine. Seven sites did not qualify, and we report them rather than hide them:

• Two sites demoted site-wide by Google, with Google clicks down 83% and 99%. Their Bing share reflects Google’s drop.
• Two sites with pages in Bing’s index and almost no Bing impressions.
• Three sites with too little data: SEO data connector (Bing data for 51 days); WordPress translation plugin (too few search clicks to work out a share); Tutoring site (Bing data for 26 days).

Definitions

• Bing share: Bing clicks divided by Google clicks plus Bing clicks. Other engines are left out because they have no console we can read.
• Google clicks: Search Console, web search type. Image, video, News and Discover clicks are not included.
• Bing clicks: the Bing Webmaster API’s traffic totals, which Microsoft says report “all traffic combined instead of only web”, so chat clicks are in there.
• Page overlap: pages with at least one click on either engine in the window, matched by URL.

Statistics

The headline is the median across sites, so one large site cannot set it. We also give the pooled figure, with and without the largest site. Each site’s interval is a 95% Wilson score interval on its own clicks, rounded outward to whole percentages. It describes sampling noise for that site and says nothing about sites in general.

Limits

• Seven sites is a small sample, with fewer than 10,000 search clicks between them in the 90 days, and they share an owner, a niche and a way of publishing. Treat 13.0% as a benchmark for small, desktop-heavy software sites, not for the web.
• One site is 82% of the clicks. That is why we lead with the median.
• Two benchmark sites lost about half their Google clicks between spring 2026 and the window, which raises their Bing share. Without them the median is 10.2%. The other four sites are too new to compare with spring.
• The three smallest sites have few clicks, so their own shares are rough. Their intervals are in Figure 1 and the CSV.
• Our Bing history is shorter than our Google history, under five months for four of the seven sites. Shares measured over a property’s first months ran lower.
• Click-through rate and position are not comparable between the consoles, for the reasons in the CTR section.
• The analytics comparison is one 28-day snapshot of six sites, and sessions are not clicks.
• Audience mix matters. Only a median 13% of these sites’ Google clicks came from the United States. A US consumer site on mobile will see a very different split.

Download the data

The site-level CSV has one row per site examined (14 rows, Site A to Site N): description, group, Bing share with its interval, impression share, click-through rates, positions, device mix, history length and, for established sites, the percentage change in Google clicks since spring. The monthly CSV has Bing’s share by site and month. The JSON has every number on this page. No site is named, and every file holds percentages only: no click, impression or session counts. You can reuse the data and charts under CC BY 4.0: credit Murkuz and link to this page. Spotted an error? Email [email protected] and we will correct it and note the change.