Bing Webmaster Tools Audits
A second search engine grades the same site with a different marking scheme, and it shows its working more openly. Ivan Sp audits sites in Bing Webmaster Tools as a distinct check from Google Search Console. Bing crawls, indexes, and reports independently. A site passing every Google check can still carry indexation faults that only Bing’s own tools surface.
Why Bing Gets Checked Separately
I check Bing as an independent grader of the same site. Bing operates its own crawler, its own index, and its own diagnostic reports, and none of it mirrors Google exactly. A robots.txt rule or a URL inspection result can pass cleanly in Search Console while showing a different status in Bing Webmaster Tools.
Bing also powers search results for other surfaces beyond its own site. The audit stays relevant even for clients whose traffic is overwhelmingly Google-sourced today.
Sitemap and Crawl Confirmation
The audit confirms the XML sitemap is actually submitted to Bing, not only to Google. A launch checklist that stops at Google leaves this step undone by default. Crawl stats inside Bing Webmaster Tools then get compared against what the sitemap declares.
Index Coverage and URL Inspection
I read Bing’s coverage report the same way as Google’s, checked for pages excluded, blocked, or flagged, then cross-referenced against the site’s actual page inventory. URL inspection confirms specific high-value pages are indexed and readable from Bing’s own perspective.
SEO Reports and Backlink Data
Bing Webmaster Tools includes its own site-health and backlink reporting. It sometimes surfaces issues, such as a broken markup pattern or an unexpected inbound link source, that do not appear the same way in Google’s own tools. These get reviewed as a secondary source rather than the primary diagnostic.
Where This Sits in a Full Audit
Bing checks run alongside, not instead of, the primary Search Console-based audit covered under indexation diagnostics. Most findings overlap, and the value of the separate check is catching the minority that do not.
Where the Standard Advice on Bing Breaks Down
- The usual advice
- Bing carries a small share of search traffic, so optimising for Google covers everything that matters.
- What holds up in practice
- The traffic share argument was always the weaker reason to verify a Bing property. The stronger reason is diagnostic: Bing publishes per-URL data and full link lists that Search Console does not expose.
Picture an in-house SEO who cannot get link-level anchor text out of Search Console, because Google reports only a summary. The data exists in Bing’s tools, for free, for the same site.
Verification takes minutes when a Search Console property already exists, since Bing can import it directly rather than requiring separate DNS work.
I verify Bing on every technical engagement for the reports rather than for the traffic. A second independent crawler is a second opinion on the same site.
Skipping it costs nothing today and costs a diagnosis later, when a Google-only view cannot explain why specific pages never entered any index.
Four Things Commonly Assumed About Bing
How would you know if a fault existed that Google’s tools do not report?
I hear the same four objections whenever a second search engine is proposed.
| Commonly assumed | What actually holds |
|---|---|
| Bing traffic is too small to justify the work. | Verification takes minutes when a Search Console property exists. The value is the diagnostic data rather than the traffic share. |
| Bing results mirror Google closely enough. | Bing runs its own crawler, its own index, and its own guidelines. A site can be fully indexed in one and half indexed in the other. |
| Search Console already shows the link profile. | Search Console reports a sample and a summary. Bing publishes a full exportable link list with anchor text, at no cost. |
| Optimising for Bing means different content. | The content work is the same. What differs is which faults each toolset surfaces and how much per-URL detail each publishes. |
| Submitting a sitemap once is enough. | Bing recrawls on its own schedule, and IndexNow exists precisely because waiting for a recrawl is slow. |
A page missing from Bing’s index is usually missing for a reason that also affects Google. Only one of the two toolsets will tell you plainly.
What Bing Webmaster Tools Reports
- Site Explorer
- A folder-level view of every URL Bing knows about, grouped by directory.
- URL Inspection
- Bing’s index status, discovered date, and the markup Bing parsed for a single URL.
- Crawl Information
- Crawl errors, blocked URLs, and the status codes Bingbot received.
- SEO Reports
- Automated on-page checks run against Bing’s own published guidance.
- Backlinks
- Bing’s own link index, including a comparison view against nominated competitors.
- IndexNow
- An open submission protocol that notifies participating engines when a URL changes.
- Crawler user agent
- Bingbot, which identifies itself in the user agent string and supports reverse DNS verification.
A Worked Example: One Fault, Two Search Engines
Consider a 60-page professional services site that appears healthy in Google Search Console. The figures below are illustrative and show how the two toolsets disagree. They are not drawn from a client engagement.
| Check | Google Search Console | Bing Webmaster Tools |
|---|---|---|
| Pages reported indexed | 58 of 60 | 31 of 60 |
| Sitemap status | Success | Sitemap contains URLs blocked by robots.txt |
| On-page warnings | Not reported at URL level | 17 URLs flagged for missing meta description |
| Link data available | Summary of linking sites | Full link list with anchor text, exportable |
Ivan Sp reads the disagreement as information rather than noise. The blocked-URL warning was always true, and only one of the two toolsets said so plainly.
Two proofreaders catch different typos. Running one because the other exists means accepting whatever the first one missed.
Bing’s index is also the index several answer engines have drawn on, so Bing visibility is not only about Bing traffic.
How a Bing Audit Runs
I follow the sequence below whenever a site has never been checked outside Google.
- Verify the domain in Bing Webmaster Tools, or import the verified property directly from Google Search Console.
- Submit the XML sitemap, then wait for the first crawl cycle before reading any coverage figure.
- Open Site Explorer and compare the URL count per directory against the site’s own page count.
- Run URL Inspection on the ten pages that matter commercially, and record the discovered date for each.
- Read the Crawl Information report, and list every URL returning a status code other than 200.
- Work through the SEO Reports list, treating each flagged rule as a hypothesis to confirm rather than a fact.
- Export the backlink list with anchor text, and compare it against the link data already held from other tools.
- Enable IndexNow so that publishing or updating a URL notifies participating engines directly.
- Re-check coverage 14 days after the fixes, since Bing recrawls on its own schedule.
How This Work Is Scoped
I run the Bing pass inside a wider technical audit rather than as a standalone retainer.
- What arrives
- A findings list covering Bing index coverage, crawl errors, and on-page warnings, with each item verified by hand.
- Typical duration
- Three to five working days once the property is verified and the first crawl completes.
- What the client supplies
- Domain-level DNS access or Search Console ownership, so verification can be imported.
- Included
- Verification, sitemap submission, report interpretation, IndexNow setup, and a prioritised fix list.
- Not included
- Paid Microsoft Advertising work, and any promise about Bing ranking positions.
- What changes the estimate
- Sites with several verified subdomains, or a site never previously submitted to Bing.
- How it is quoted
- As a line inside a technical audit, or after a short scoping call when run alone.
Tools and Primary Sources
The references below define what each report means. Each opens in a new tab.
- Bing Webmaster Tools provides the reports, submission tools, and link data described on this page.
- Bing Webmaster Guidelines sets out what Bing asks of a site, which differs in emphasis from Google’s guidance.
- IndexNow documents the open submission protocol and the key file a site must host.
- Verifying Bingbot publishes the reverse DNS method for confirming a crawler request is genuine.
Check Your Own Site in Ten Minutes
I suggest a comparison anyone can run before deciding whether a full Bing pass is worthwhile.
- Search Bing for site: followed by your domain, and note the approximate result count.
- Run the same query on Google, and compare the two figures.
- Open your five most important URLs in Bing search directly, and confirm each one appears.
A Bing count far below the Google count usually points at a crawl or sitemap fault rather than at content quality. Verifying the property turns that guess into a report.
Common Questions
How much organic traffic actually comes from Bing?
It varies by industry and audience, and it is worth checking directly in analytics before assuming Bing is negligible. Certain demographics and regions carry a meaningfully higher share of Bing traffic than the overall average.
Do I need to submit a separate sitemap to Bing?
Yes. Bing Webmaster Tools requires its own sitemap submission independent of what has been submitted to Google, and it is a step a Google-only launch checklist commonly misses.
Does fixing an issue in Search Console also fix it in Bing?
Not automatically. A structural fix, such as a corrected canonical tag, usually resolves the same way on both engines, because both are reading the live page. Each engine’s own tools still need checking to confirm it was recognized.
Does Bing visibility matter if most traffic comes from Google?
Bing supplies results and index data to several other surfaces, including Microsoft products and some answer engines. Bing’s tools also expose link and on-page data at a level of detail Search Console does not publish.
Discuss This Work
The first call is a free 30-minute consultation with no pitch attached. You receive an honest assessment of where the site stands and what can realistically be built.