Google or Facebook for a tree service?
They are not two versions of the same thing, and the difference is not budget or audience size. One reaches people already looking for you. The other reaches people who have a problem and have not started looking yet. That single distinction explains almost everything else.
Google captures demand. Facebook creates it.
Someone typing "emergency tree removal" has already decided. They are comparing options, they want a number, and they will call whoever looks credible first. Google puts you in front of that person at the moment of decision, which is why the leads tend to be closer to booking.
Nobody opens Facebook to look for a tree service. But a great many homeowners have a tree they have been worrying about for two years and have never once searched for it. Facebook reaches that person, which is a far larger group, earlier, before they are comparing you against four competitors.
A slow month means different things on each
On Google, a quiet month can genuinely be the season. Fewer people searched, so there was less to capture, and no amount of new ad copy invents storms. That is a real constraint and we will say so rather than dress it up.
On Facebook that excuse does not apply, because the platform was never waiting for anyone to search. If leads dry up there, the targeting or the creative stopped working. That is a fault to fix, not a season to wait out, and it is worth knowing which answer you should be getting.
They break in opposite ways
Facebook ads fatigue. The same creative in front of the same audience stops earning attention within weeks and your cost per lead climbs while nothing about your business changed. New creative is the fix, and it is an ongoing cost of running the platform.
Google does not work like that. Running the same ad copy for months is fine; the lever there is targeting. Which locations, which hours, which devices, which search terms deserve your money and which are draining it. Confusing the two is how agencies end up making more creative for a Google problem, or refreshing targeting for a Facebook one.
So which one first?
If you need the phone to ring this week and your budget only stretches to one, Google, because you are talking to people already trying to hire someone.
If you have Google running and want to grow beyond the number of people currently searching in your area, Facebook, because that ceiling is real and search volume is finite.
Most established tree companies end up running both, for the straightforward reason that the pool of people already searching is smaller than the pool of people with a problem.
Questions
Can I run both on a small budget?
You can, but splitting a small budget across two platforms often means neither gets enough to learn properly. One platform funded well usually beats two funded thinly.
Which gives cheaper leads?
Usually Facebook on the raw number, because those people were not actively shopping. Google leads often close at a higher rate because they were. Compare what a booked job costs on each, not what a lead costs.
What about Local Services Ads?
They sit above the normal Google results and charge per lead rather than per click. For some tree companies they are the best money on the platform; for others they are a distraction. It depends on your service area and the competition in it.