- Content source
- https://youtu.be/XcqG8rAXNeY
Avira vs Panda Dome: The Shocking Truth You Need to See!
Avira vs Panda Dome: The Shocking Truth You Need to See!
Software Review Avira vs Panda Dome: The Shocking Truth You Need to See!
- Thread starter NB InfoTech
- Start date
Video Reviews - Security and Privacy
21 Replies
2,168 Views
Reviews reflect the reviewer's setup and methods. Check the evidence and limitations.
Thread details
A single comparison video is not enough to draw a strong conclusion about either product.
Security product comparisons on YouTube can be interesting, but they also have important limits:
- Test conditions may not reflect real-world use
- The sample set can strongly influence the result
- Detection is only one part of protection
- False positives, performance, update speed, web protection, and ransomware protection also matter
In general terms
Avira and Panda Dome are both well-known consumer security products, but they take somewhat different approaches.
- Avira is often viewed as a more traditional antivirus suite with a strong focus on signature and cloud-assisted detection
- Panda Dome is commonly associated with cloud-heavy detection and a lighter local footprint on some systems
- Real-world experience can vary a lot depending on system configuration, browsing habits, and which suite features are enabled
What to look at besides the video
If the goal is to compare them fairly, it helps to check multiple sources:
- Independent lab results from AV-Test, AV-Comparatives, or SE Labs
- False-positive rates, not just malware blocking rates
- System impact during normal use
- How each product handles phishing, malicious downloads, and ransomware behavior
- Quality of support, interface, and pricing
Important caution
I would avoid treating a title like “shocking truth” as evidence by itself. That kind of wording is often more about attracting clicks than providing a balanced technical conclusion.
Bottom line
The video may be useful as one data point, but it should not be the only basis for choosing between Avira and Panda Dome. A balanced decision should come from multiple independent tests and real-world user feedback.
Avira: 80%
Panda: 15.3%
Panda: 15.3%
But 15%? SUPERAntiSpyware would do better!
Andy Ful
From Hard_Configurator Tools
Verified
Honorary Member
Top Poster
Developer
Well-known
Forum Veteran
This is a good example of how the test should not be done.
The author insisted on using the testing tool (Mal Tester Auto) to test Panda, but the tool crashed a few times, and most samples were not tested. The system with Panda was compromised by Remcos (autostart entry). However, there were problems with malware installation, so it is probable that the malware was mitigated by Panda. After a folder scan, about half of the samples still survived, which confirms the well-known poor signature detection of Panda.
Instead of running the rest of the threats, the author executed Norton Power Eraser and Hitman Pro ????? Those tools did not detect the infection, but removed some not tested samples.
The test with Avira was done without complications (16 samples survived). The author executed Norton Power Eraser and Hitman Pro, which did not detect the infection, but removed some samples. Finally, a few malware samples survived (the same samples as for Panda, except the Remcos malware). However, the system was compromised (Chrome browser deleted, problems with opening Edge). At least one malware was installed successfully, but Avira seemed to block it with an alert.
In both cases, there could be more malware because the author performed only a very basic inspection.
I have no idea how this video could be interpreted in favor of Avira (except for better signatures).
The author insisted on using the testing tool (Mal Tester Auto) to test Panda, but the tool crashed a few times, and most samples were not tested. The system with Panda was compromised by Remcos (autostart entry). However, there were problems with malware installation, so it is probable that the malware was mitigated by Panda. After a folder scan, about half of the samples still survived, which confirms the well-known poor signature detection of Panda.
Instead of running the rest of the threats, the author executed Norton Power Eraser and Hitman Pro ????? Those tools did not detect the infection, but removed some not tested samples.
The test with Avira was done without complications (16 samples survived). The author executed Norton Power Eraser and Hitman Pro, which did not detect the infection, but removed some samples. Finally, a few malware samples survived (the same samples as for Panda, except the Remcos malware). However, the system was compromised (Chrome browser deleted, problems with opening Edge). At least one malware was installed successfully, but Avira seemed to block it with an alert.
In both cases, there could be more malware because the author performed only a very basic inspection.
I have no idea how this video could be interpreted in favor of Avira (except for better signatures).
Last edited:
F
ForgottenSeer 123960
The test is a classic "local execution" scenario, dumping a massive zip file of malware directly onto the desktop and rapid-firing the executables. This is not a "true route of infection" test, and it severely skews the results against engines like Panda for a few key reasons.
Solutions like Panda prioritize the perimeter. They are designed to intercept threats at the point of delivery, blocking malicious URLs, analyzing network traffic during a download, or scanning email attachments. By magically dropping the malware onto the desktop, the tester bypassed the engine's primary defensive layers entirely.
Rapidly executing dozens of local files via an automated script creates an artificial bottleneck. Cloud-first engines rely on a tiny local signature cache and require a split-second to query the cloud for unknown files. When a script fires off executables simultaneously, it forces a race condition where a payload might establish a foothold before the cloud response can return a block command.
Cloud detection and behavioral analysis thrive on context (e.g., how a file arrived, what process spawned it). By forcing the engine to make a split-second decision based purely on local execution, the tester stripped away the context the engine needs to accurately determine intent.
It’s an interesting demonstration of local scanning speed, but it tells us next to nothing about how these products would actually perform against a real-world attack chain.
Solutions like Panda prioritize the perimeter. They are designed to intercept threats at the point of delivery, blocking malicious URLs, analyzing network traffic during a download, or scanning email attachments. By magically dropping the malware onto the desktop, the tester bypassed the engine's primary defensive layers entirely.
Rapidly executing dozens of local files via an automated script creates an artificial bottleneck. Cloud-first engines rely on a tiny local signature cache and require a split-second to query the cloud for unknown files. When a script fires off executables simultaneously, it forces a race condition where a payload might establish a foothold before the cloud response can return a block command.
Cloud detection and behavioral analysis thrive on context (e.g., how a file arrived, what process spawned it). By forcing the engine to make a split-second decision based purely on local execution, the tester stripped away the context the engine needs to accurately determine intent.
It’s an interesting demonstration of local scanning speed, but it tells us next to nothing about how these products would actually perform against a real-world attack chain.
Oh, I'm shocked!!! Here we go again 
At times being on this forum is like watching the 6:00 P.M. news; fear, dread, everybody and everything is being hacked, compromised etc. etc. Not that I don't want to be informed which is a majority of the forum, but it gets to be a bit much.
In this test posted, Avira is 80%, in the the other test it was ~99.5%, and AV-Comparatives 2025 Real World Protection, 99.5% I'm not saying this defensively or trying to justify using F-Secure, but this stuff is getting old (no offense to the OP).
And 9 times out of 10? this is the case:
Today it's hitting 70 degrees F outside in MN for the first time this Spring
It's time to get out more and spend less time here, and observing that "no, the sky is not falling" 
I'll keep the F-Secure thread updated, unless @Lord Ami beats me to it Cheers
At times being on this forum is like watching the 6:00 P.M. news; fear, dread, everybody and everything is being hacked, compromised etc. etc. Not that I don't want to be informed which is a majority of the forum, but it gets to be a bit much.In this test posted, Avira is 80%, in the the other test it was ~99.5%, and AV-Comparatives 2025 Real World Protection, 99.5% I'm not saying this defensively or trying to justify using F-Secure, but this stuff is getting old (no offense to the OP).
And 9 times out of 10? this is the case:
Today it's hitting 70 degrees F outside in MN for the first time this Spring
It's time to get out more and spend less time here, and observing that "no, the sky is not falling" I'll keep the F-Secure thread updated, unless @Lord Ami beats me to it Cheers 
I don't understand why the antivirus program was named after the panda, as the animal is notoriously lazy. However, cats have fast reflexes, so the outcome might have been better if they had selected a cat rather than a panda. And to make the name more technologically appropriate, I think a name like Thunder Cat Antivirus would be nice.
Panda AV originated from Spain. Likely they want to show the world that Panda is a native of Spain and not from China.
Why is Panda called Panda?
Are you surprised that an antivirus company was called "Panda" because you associate the name with that of a loving and cute animal?
www.pandasecurity.com
People love pandas, I stopped using Panda, when they removed Panda tray icon, it was a deal breaker for me. No Panda, no AV! Kaspersky allowed to use Panda tray icon.
So you would like them to run an add campaign, informing the public at large, that they are changing their name to "Pussy Antivirus"
For those who would protest, Google says: ""Pussy" is a diminutive of the word "puss," which has been used as a name for a cat since the 1500s. It likely originates from a Germanic or Low German word (puus), possibly mimicking the hissing sound used to call a cat. Over time, it became a generic, endearing term for a cat or kitten"
There's no tray icon at all? Or just something bland?
They have removed Panda icon, what is the point of using Panda AV without Panda icon!
Panda cries. 
It is not like people would use Panda AV for protection. 
Speaking of antivirus software icons, shouldn't Microsoft purchase the AVG icon and replace the Windows Security/Defender icon with it? It appears to be very Microsoft-like.
or pay a little bit more and get that of Chrome for Edge.
Australia could have a cute and cuddly AV such as "Quokka Love & Protect" or something similar.
'World's happiest animal', the quokka, becomes the most popular tourist attraction at Australia's Rottnest Island
They have been described as the 'world's happiest animal' and a photo of a Quokka snapping a selfie has proven why.
Australia could also make a more agressive AV such as "Taipan Assassin" or something like that.
Coastal taipan - Wikipedia
Lots of ideas for Oz. That's3 home to lots of dangerous,venomous and unfriendly animals.Australia could have a cute and cuddly AV such as "Quokka Love & Protect" or something similar.
'World's happiest animal', the quokka, becomes the most popular tourist attraction at Australia's Rottnest Island
They have been described as the 'world's happiest animal' and a photo of a Quokka snapping a selfie has proven why.www.smh.com.au
Australia could also make a more agressive AV such as "Taipan Assassin" or something like that.
Coastal taipan - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Recently browsing
Members who viewed this thread in the last 5 minutes
You may also like...
-
Software Review Panda Dome Advanced Antivirus 2026 -
Software Review Panda Dome Free Antivirus 2026
-
-
Software Review Panda Dome Free Antivirus 2025
-
