Av-comparatives Real-World Protection Test March 2016


Level 1
Dec 21, 2014

AV-Comparatives - Independent Tests of Anti-Virus Software - Real World Protection Test Overview

Last edited:


Level 40
Sep 26, 2014
I think that AVG has improved a lot lately, very good protection score with zero false positives.
But from this chart i can see that all products offer good protection, even Defender which is last it's score is more than 95%

Deleted Member 333v73x

Avira - Really improving, I am impressed @Avira!
Bitdefender - Not surprised :)
F-Secure - Like Avira, it is really improving keep it up @F-Secure!
Trend Micro - Never really used it :/
AVG - Good signatures, 0 false positives :)
eScan - Never really used it :/
Vipre - Never really used it :/
ESET - Expected better for what it is, but well-done @ESET!
Emsisoft - Amazing as usual :)
Kaspersky - Really was expecting better for Kaspersky o_O
Tencent - Never really used it :/
Avast! - Really expected better with its 'Streaming Updates' and other features...
Bullguard - Never really used it :/
Lavasoft - Never really used it :/
Fortinet - Never really used it :/
Quick Heal - Never really used it :/
Sophos - Commercial-grade, i was expecting it in the top 5...
McAfee - Not happy.
Microsoft - With it's cloud and machine learning, come on!


Wonder why webroot or Qihoo is still not in these tests? Tencent looks good but alot of these malware programs hate that av for some reason.

Webroot doesn't participate because their rank is has always been inconsistent - sometimes towards the top, sometimes towards the bottom.

Webroot only participates in AV lab tests that will rank it high.

Webroot says "No one understands how Webroot SecureAnywhere works" and AV lab testing is "inapplicable because of the way WSA works."

Users report potential security holes and they never get fixed. Webroot thinks in "real-world scenarios" these security holes are extremely unlikely.

For example, execute malicious script that deletes entire drive with Webroot installed and see what happens...


New Member
Feb 4, 2016
In these tests it is a grain of salt ... but it's amazing how Bitdefender always sends well, I do not follow all the results of these tests, but whenever I see Bitdefender always sends well!
I expected more from ESET, anyway is a good result.
I'm a little surprised with the result of Kaspersky, I expected more.


It's the face of stupidity to compare AVs in this way.

Execute malwares that they do not detect and you will see that in a significant portion of cases the AV cannot protect the system.

It's a joke.

All that should matter is if an AV can protect the system if a user executes an undetected malware.

That's it. That should be the measure of protection.
Last edited by a moderator:


Staff member
Malware Hunter
Apr 28, 2015
Certainly this month Kaspersky fell down in detection, it usually gets the great results in this test, anyway 99.1% is good enough... let's wait the results in next test :)

Visit MalWare Hub section in this forum, almost everyday We check dynamically unknown samples against some Security products :)