PR vs Marketing: Why They Should Be Measured Differently

Nearly every fintech company that invests in communications eventually starts to ask the same question: how to measure PR results. They want to know how many leads a publication delivered and whether a Tier 1 mention’s conversion can be measured.

It is a reasonable question, as those companies are used to checking the efficiency of everything with numbers. But PR and communications often work on a different timescale. The key difference in PR vs marketing measurement is that marketing often targets immediate demand. PR, meanwhile, builds reputation over a much longer period.

When a company asks how many leads an article produced, it actually has to decide between two different goals. It’s much like the choice between media coverage quality and quantity. Does it want to buy customers this quarter or build a reputation that will attract new customers for years? Both goals have their merits. Still, they demand different budgets and channels. While the first one is often achieved through marketing, the second comes through consistent long-term PR effort.

Alina Sysoeva, Head of PR at Drofa Comms, argues that the desire to judge everything by measurable marketing metrics may actually hurt PR campaigns. Below, we share her insights on this topic, based on years of PR experience in fintech advising companies in fintech and financial services.

What Is the Difference Between PR and Marketing?

PR primarily builds reputation, trust and long-term brand preference, while marketing is more directly focused on generating demand and converting potential customers. This difference also affects measurement. Marketing often relies on leads, conversions and acquisition costs, while PR requires metrics that reflect visibility, credibility and reputation over time.

PR vs Marketing: Why Do They Work on Different Timelines?

To understand why marketing metrics rarely work well in PR, it helps to look at the audience those fields target. Data shows that at any given time, only 5% of potential clients are actually looking for a new partner. Marketing often aims directly at this small share of the market, trying to quickly capture attention when the demand already exists and is openly expressed.

PR, in turn, works with the remaining 95% of the market. Some companies will definitely need new financial services in, for example, the next two years. But if you spend all the effort fighting for the attention of the 5% already willing to buy, you miss the opportunity to become a trustworthy choice for future buyers.

Judging PR on the marketing metrics and clients it attracts in this quarter puts you in the competition for the smallest slice of the market. In contrast, PR lets you build a strong reputation that will be remembered for years.

How PR Shapes B2B Buying Decisions

Companies often believe that decisions about buying services are made in the moment. In practice, however, customers form impressions of potential partners much earlier, through information available on you in the market. By the time they call to learn about your proposal, they are often already close to making a decision.

In 94% of cases, a company looking for a partner has already decided who it wants to work with even before a first conversation. What’s more, 77% of clients tend to buy services from their initial favourite provider.

This is why an earned reputation built in advance matters so much. Trying to win over clients who have already chosen a different partner is an extremely hard task. It doesn’t matter how large your marketing budget may be. But if the client sees your company in known industry ratings, they will be much more likely to pay attention to you.

Many such small details decide who exactly will be on the shortlist of providers to reach out to first, and relying on marketing metrics alone is unlikely to get you there.

How to Measure PR Effectiveness

This does not mean, however, that PR cannot be measured by any meaningful metrics, or that it should be based entirely on the “sixth sense” of communication professionals. There are plenty of tools to assess PR efficiency; they are simply different from marketing ones.

The problem here is that many senior decision-makers still tend to judge PR by wrong metrics, which, in turn, often leads to disappointment. 82% of chief executives consider measurements used in their organisation to be of little use. At the same time, more than two-thirds of marketing directors call their own metrics extremely accurate. This gap creates tension because dissatisfied management may try to intervene in PR processes, believing they are not efficient enough.

To overcome this, a fintech company may choose several metrics which are numerically defensible and give useful information about reputation:

• A share of voice in two or three topics relevant to your business instead of total mention count
• Message pull-through, showing whether journalists repeat your thoughts on an issue without prompting
• Composition of inbound interest, measured by seniority and deal size rather than just volume
• Your presence in the sources that shape your target industry, including those that are often cited by AI
• Response time and message discipline during a crisis incident.
• Even the simplest test, showing what a prospective partner finds on the first page of search results, fits in well here.

All of these metrics may be tracked monthly and quarterly. Yet, they don’t replace the goal of building reputation the way chasing marketing results often does.

FAQ