Most B2B SaaS teams starting paid media face the same question: LinkedIn or Google? Both platforms work for B2B. They work differently, at different price points, on different timelines. This post covers the current benchmark data on each, what $5K/month actually buys on both platforms, and a specific budget split based on where the numbers land.
| Google Search Ads | LinkedIn Ads | |
|---|---|---|
| Avg. CPC (B2B SaaS) | $3.80–$4.22 | $8–$12 |
| Avg. CTR | 3–5% | 0.44–0.65% |
| Cost per lead | $100–$135 | $77–$333 |
| Pipeline per $1 spent | $1.25 ROAS | $6.01 pipeline |
| Conversion timeline | Days to weeks | Weeks to months |
| Best for | Capturing existing demand | Building demand with ICP |
What Google Ads costs in B2B SaaS
According to WordStream's 2025 Google Ads benchmarks, the average cost per click across all industries is $5.26, with an average conversion rate of 7.52% and average cost per lead of $70.11. B2B technology sits higher. LOCALiQ's 2025 search advertising benchmarks (LOCALiQ is owned by Gannett) put B2B technology CPC at $3.80 to $4.22, with conversion rates around 3.75% and cost per acquisition at $133.52 for technology companies.
At $5K/month on Google Search ads with a $4 average CPC and 3.75% conversion rate, that's roughly 1,250 clicks and 47 leads per month. Cost per lead lands around $106. These leads are people who searched for something related to your product category, which means they have some level of existing intent.
What LinkedIn Ads costs in B2B SaaS
HockeyStack's 2025 LinkedIn Ads Benchmark Report, based on $28 million in ad spend across 70+ B2B SaaS companies, provides the most comprehensive dataset available. LinkedIn CPC for B2B SaaS in North America runs $8 to $12, with cost per lead between $100 and $150 depending on targeting specificity. Click-through rates average 0.44% to 0.65% across formats.
At $5K/month on LinkedIn with a $10 average CPC, that's roughly 500 clicks. Using LinkedIn Lead Gen Forms (which convert at around 13% according to NAV43's 2025 benchmarks analysis), that produces about 65 leads. With standard landing pages converting at 2-3%, the number drops to 10-15 leads. Cost per lead ranges from $77 (Lead Gen Forms) to $333 (landing pages).
The lead quality difference matters here. LinkedIn's targeting allows you to reach specific job titles, company sizes, and industries. A lead from a VP of Marketing at a 200-person SaaS company who filled out a Lead Gen Form is a different asset than a lead from someone who searched "marketing automation software" on Google. Both are useful. They represent different stages of the buying process.
Pipeline ROI tells a different story than CPL
Cost per lead comparisons between Google and LinkedIn are common but incomplete. The more relevant metric is pipeline generated per dollar spent. HockeyStack's data shows that for every $1 invested in LinkedIn Ads, B2B SaaS companies generated $6.01 in pipeline on average. That number accounts for the higher CPL because LinkedIn leads tend to convert to opportunities at higher rates when the targeting is precise.
On the Google side, Factors.ai's ROI comparison (Factors.ai is a B2B attribution platform) found LinkedIn delivering 1.8x ROAS compared to Google's 1.25x across their customer base. The gap narrows or reverses when Google is used for high-intent bottom-of-funnel keywords rather than broad category terms.
The attribution method changes the picture substantially. Gartner's Q4 2024 analysis found that companies using multi-touch attribution models achieve 27% higher marketing ROI than those using last-click attribution. Last-click attribution systematically undervalues LinkedIn (which often influences deals without being the final click) and overvalues Google (which often captures existing demand rather than creating it).
What each platform is better at
Google Ads captures existing demand. When someone searches "best CRM for small sales teams," they have a problem and are looking for solutions. Google puts your product in front of them at that moment. The conversion timeline is short: days to weeks from click to demo request. This makes Google the stronger channel for producing leads that convert to pipeline this quarter.
LinkedIn Ads builds demand with a specific audience. You're reaching people who match your ideal customer profile but aren't actively searching for a solution. They may not know your category exists, or they may not be in a buying cycle yet. The conversion timeline is longer: weeks to months. LinkedIn is the stronger channel for building pipeline that converts next quarter and beyond.
HockeyStack's data reflects this: B2B SaaS companies now allocate 45%+ of their paid media budget to LinkedIn, up from roughly 35% two years ago. That shift isn't because LinkedIn is cheaper (it isn't). It's because pipeline attribution data is showing LinkedIn's influence on deals that were previously attributed entirely to other channels.
A specific budget split for $5K/month
For a B2B SaaS company spending $5K/month on paid media for the first time, the data supports a 60/40 split favoring Google in the first 90 days, then shifting toward 50/50 or 40/60 (favoring LinkedIn) once you have conversion data.
The reasoning: Google produces attributable leads faster, which is important when you need early signal on what messaging and offers work. Spend $3K/month on Google Search targeting high-intent keywords specific to your category. Spend $2K/month on LinkedIn targeting your ICP with a content offer or Lead Gen Form. After 90 days, compare cost per opportunity (not cost per lead) across both channels and reallocate based on what you find.
Three specifics that affect the split:
- If your average contract value is under $10K/year, weight Google more heavily. The shorter sales cycle means Google's faster conversion timeline matters more, and the lower ACV makes LinkedIn's higher CPL harder to justify on a per-deal basis.
- If your ACV is above $25K/year, weight LinkedIn more heavily from the start. Longer sales cycles give LinkedIn's demand generation time to work, and higher deal values absorb the CPL premium. HockeyStack's $6.01 pipeline-per-dollar figure is most relevant to companies in this range.
- If your category has low search volume (fewer than 1,000 monthly searches for your core keywords), LinkedIn may need to be the primary channel regardless of ACV. Google can only capture demand that already exists in search. If people aren't searching for what you sell, LinkedIn's ability to reach your audience directly becomes the more viable path.
What to track beyond cost per lead
CPL is the easiest metric to compare across channels but the least useful for budget decisions. The metrics that actually inform channel allocation are:
- Cost per opportunity: what does it cost to generate a qualified pipeline opportunity from each channel
- Lead-to-opportunity conversion rate: what percentage of leads from each channel become real deals
- Average deal size by source: LinkedIn leads may close at different deal sizes than Google leads
If you're only tracking CPL, Google will almost always look better. If you're tracking cost per opportunity and factoring in deal size, the comparison becomes more nuanced and LinkedIn's position improves. Set up attribution tracking before you start spending, not after. Retroactive attribution is unreliable and will lead to bad reallocation decisions.
For how LinkedIn's targeting capabilities fit into an account-based marketing strategy, see our guide to ABM on a startup budget.