First of all, itt's AV-Comparatives and not AV-Test and secondly: if the results could be bought, then companies like Symantec would be best everywhere, because they have the most of it, Trend Micro would score better than Kaspersky, because they make more than they, and many underdogs wouldn't fare better than the bellwethers of the industry.Money will make your product at av-test.org
Panda's detection rate is good as long as we are in online. I think NOD32 and Panda had similar detection rate when Internet is available. Its is during offline where the NOD32 zooms past Panda comprehensively.ESET 98.7% and Panda 99,9% it doesn't seem very realistic to me and It would be interesting to see Webroot around here.
I very much agree with this statement.Dont blindly depend on any of these results. Its pure non sense in real world use. For example Avira Free do had the 99.9% detection rate and Avast Free had lower. If you are just depended on antivirus software alone then you are more likely to get infected by using Avira Free than Avast Free even though Avira Free had higher detection rate. There are some of my friends who just depended on Avira Free alone without any other security measures got infected easily where such occurrence is rare with Avast Free even though Avira had stronger detection rate. Real world protection is a lot different than what these charts says.
Rather than judging the results of these independent labs and wondering why your favorite product scored a few points below than the competitors and saying that there's foul-play, it's better to take the wise route and sticking onto your current antivirus, because at the end of the day any antivirus can protect you fairly and none is fool-proof.