The difference that actually matters
Almost every comparison of these platforms talks about audiences and creative formats. The decision is usually simpler than that, and it comes down to billing.
Meta charges you per thousand impressions. Clicks are incidental — you are buying attention, and some of that attention converts into visits. This is why a $5-a-day campaign still functions there: five dollars buys a meaningful number of impressions.
Google charges you per click. At a $20 cost per click, which is ordinary for home services, $5 a day buys one visitor every four days. No amount of optimisation rescues that, because there is nothing to optimise — the campaign never accumulates enough data to learn from.
So the first question is not 'which platform is better'. It is 'can I afford enough clicks on Google for the campaign to function'. If the answer is no, the choice is made for you.
Side by side
| Google Search | Meta | |
|---|---|---|
| What you buy | Clicks | Impressions |
| Typical cost | $10–40 per click | $5–15 per 1,000 impressions |
| Typical CTR | 3–5% | 0.8–1.8% |
| Intent | They asked for it | You interrupted them |
| Works on $5/day | No | Yes |
| Needs a website | Usually | No — native lead forms |
| Time to first result | Days | Days to weeks |
| Best for | Urgent, searched-for needs | Discovery, visual products, local awareness |
Choose Google when
People search for the problem
Emergency plumbing, locksmiths, legal help, urgent repairs. Nobody scrolls Instagram hoping to find a plumber; they search the moment the pipe bursts.
The purchase is urgent
Intent decays fast. If someone needs it today, being the answer when they search beats being memorable next week.
You can afford the clicks
Check the real cost per click for your industry before committing. At $40 a click in legal, a small budget is not a small campaign — it is no campaign.
Choose Meta when
Nobody searches for it
New products, impulse purchases, services people don't know exist. If there is no search volume, there is nothing to bid on.
The product is visual
Anything where seeing it is most of the persuasion — food, interiors, clothing, gyms, salons.
Your budget is small
Below roughly $1,500 a month, Meta will almost always produce more for the money simply because impressions are cheaper than clicks.
You have no website worth sending traffic to
Native lead forms collect the enquiry inside the platform and convert at 10–25% against a website's 5–15%, with no tracking code to install.
Running both
Eventually most businesses want both, and they complement each other well — Meta creates demand, Google captures it.
The mistake is splitting one small budget across the two. A $600 monthly budget divided in half puts both campaigns below the level at which either platform can learn, and you get two failing campaigns instead of one working one.
Budgets for a second platform should be additive, not divided. If you cannot fund both properly, fund one properly.
Questions
Which is cheaper, Facebook or Google Ads?[+][-]
Meta is far cheaper per click, but the comparison is misleading — Google clicks come from people actively looking for what you sell, so a higher share of them convert. Compare cost per lead, not cost per click.
Should I run both at the same time?[+][-]
Only if you can fund both above their practical floors. Splitting a small budget across two platforms puts both below the level at which either can optimise.
Which is better for local businesses?[+][-]
It depends on urgency. Emergency and repair services do better on Google because the search happens at the moment of need. Discretionary local services — salons, gyms, restaurants — usually do better on Meta.
Which is easier to start with?[+][-]
Meta, mainly because native lead forms remove the need for a landing page or conversion tracking. Google requires more setup before the first campaign can work properly.
Keep reading
EXOD does this part for you.
It plans, writes and launches the campaigns, then watches these numbers every day and adjusts them — inside your own ad account.
Start free