Bing Rank Tracking: Worth a Keyword Slot?

Tracking Bing consumes exactly the same allowance as tracking Google — one keyword, one engine, one slot at almost every vendor — so the question is not whether a tool supports Bing but whether your Bing traffic justifies halving your keyword budget. For most sites it does not, and for a specific minority it very much does.

The good news is that you can settle it for nothing before you spend a single tracked keyword.

Find out for free before you pay anything

Microsoft publishes Bing Webmaster Tools, free, with its own search performance report covering the queries you actually appeared for. It is the same shape of instrument as Google Search Console: your own data, from the engine itself, with no keyword allowance to consume and no scraping involved.

Open it and look at impressions. If Bing is producing a rounding error next to Google, you have your answer and it cost you nothing. If it is producing a meaningful share — and in some categories it does — then you know what you are buying a second engine for, and roughly how much it is worth.

That is the whole decision procedure, and it is more reliable than any general claim about market share, because market share is not the question. Your share is.

Who genuinely benefits from tracking Bing

Business and enterprise software. Windows defaults and corporate managed devices put a meaningful slice of office searching through Bing, and that audience has budget authority.

Categories with an older audience. Default search engines survive longer where people change fewer settings, and that skews some markets noticeably.

Anyone whose analytics already shows it. This is the only argument that matters. If Bing is already converting for you, tracking it is not speculative.

Sites watching AI answers. Microsoft Copilot draws on Bing's index, which makes Bing visibility a component of a distinct kind of visibility — although prompt monitoring is a separate product from rank tracking, covered on AI search visibility trackers.

What it costs in practice

Nothing extra in subscription terms and everything in allowance terms. Add Bing to 500 tracked keywords and you are now tracking 1,000, which on the prices read 24 September 2026 moves SE Ranking's Core plan from about six cents a keyword to about twelve, and Semrush's entry SEO plan from about twenty-eight cents to about fifty-six.

The sensible pattern is the same one that works for devices: track Google across the whole list, and add Bing for a small, deliberately chosen subset — the ten or twenty commercial terms where a Bing visitor would be worth having. That costs a few per cent of your allowance rather than half of it.

What to check before assuming a tool covers it

Most general-purpose trackers support multiple engines, but the details vary and the pricing pages rarely spell them out. Three things are worth confirming inside a trial rather than reading off marketing copy.

Whether Bing counts as a separate tracked keyword or as a property of an existing one. This is the entire cost question and vendors are inconsistent about it.

Whether the location and language settings apply to Bing in the same way they apply to Google. A tool that geolocates Google queries precisely may treat Bing more coarsely.

Whether reporting separates the engines or averages them into one line. An averaged chart across two engines is worse than no chart, because it hides the movement in both.

None of those appear on any pricing page on the rank tracker board, which is a reminder that the trial is where engine support gets verified.

Reading a two-engine chart without fooling yourself

A keyword tracked on both engines produces two series, and the temptation is to read them as one story about your site. They are not. Bing and Google build their result pages from different indexes with different freshness, so a page can be climbing in one while drifting in the other for reasons that have nothing to do with each other.

The most common false alarm is a Bing position moving several places on a day when nothing changed. Smaller result sets and different refresh behaviour make individual readings noisier, and a tool that samples once a day on an engine with fewer competing pages will show more movement per reading than the same tool does on Google. Read a fortnight, not a Tuesday.

The second false alarm is the opposite: a Bing series that is suspiciously flat for weeks. That usually means what it appears to mean — nothing is changing — but it can also mean the tracker is querying from a default country or language you never set, which is worth checking once rather than believing for a quarter.

A note on what this site does not claim

There is no Bing policy quoted anywhere on this site about automated rank checking, and that is deliberate: Microsoft's webmaster guidelines page returned no readable text when it was checked on 24 September 2026, so nothing is quoted from it. Google's position on scraping for rank-checking is published plainly and is quoted in full on the rank tracker board; Bing's is simply not something this desk has read at the source.

That gap is stated rather than filled with a plausible-sounding paraphrase, because the difference between "Microsoft says" and "people generally assume Microsoft says" is exactly the difference this site exists to hold.

The short answer

Check Bing Webmaster Tools, which is free. If Bing is a real share of your impressions, add it for your top commercial terms only. If it is not, spend those keyword slots on mobile positions instead, which will almost certainly change more decisions.