To compare BitDefender and ESET. I understand that this thread is for people who want to understand things and set up AV to suit themselves. I see it as questionable whether ESET also takes it that way. Looking at ESET's corporate communications, I see the message everywhere: The important thing is the perfect balance.My friend, have in mind this is my personal opinion, and defines the answer as the way I see home security.
I believe BitDefender is a great standalone product, that's made to install and forget, since it's extremely automatic. Regarding its protection capabilities, it's a top notch product.
On the other hand, ESET offers a different type of security. With this configuration, ESET is the total opposite of "install and forget". This product has the advantage that it can be configured to the way you want to sense security. This thread aims at a user-dependant type of product. This setup will not look to be smart and decide for you, it will prompt you whenever something's not right, because you gave it rules to do so.
Aside from that, the automatic mode from ESET is very smart and its signatures are rather good.
So it's more of a: what am I looking for? Rather than what's best.
If you don't wanna get involved in your security, BitDefender is your choice.
If you want to know everything that's going on within your system, ESET is your choice.
PS: but you must be careful and study your product, because modules such as a HIPS can be extremely smart and secure, but will definitely break your system if you fail to understand how it works.
Security solutions that install in minutes. You simply set them up and then you can leave them to work independently and seamlessly in the background. So install and worry no more. The concept of Balance also implies, in my opinion, a certain caution in the "aggressiveness" of the various default settings, as ESET sees it as better to miss something occasionally than to deal with FP more often. This can be seen in the Default settings of the firewall (everything "out" open), HIPS (almost no blocking) and even the AV engine itself (PUA disabled). ˇProtection effectiveness in various tests should be (and is mostly measured) just in the most user-friendly Default settings.
I also think that AV should work "autonomously" without user interaction. He is working on the PC, not "fighting" with malware.
Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)