AV-Comparatives Consumer Summary Report 2025

[Minimalist]

The Austrian antivirus testing lab AV-Comparatives has released its annual Summary Report highlighting the results for consumer security test for the year 2025 (PDF available here). This report contains awards recognizing individual programs in various categories. Additionally a user-interface review for each tested products is included.

Consumer Summary Report 2025

AV-Comparatives has released its annual Summary Report highlighting the results for consumer security test for the year 2025.

www.av-comparatives.org

 

[Parkinsond]

Which is more important for home use? Real-World Protection Test or Malware Protection Test or Advanced Threat Protection Test?

 

[lokamoka820]

Which is more important for home use? Real-World Protection Test or Malware Protection Test or Advanced Threat Protection Test?

I guess Real-World Protection Test.

 

[SeriousHoax]

Which is more important for home use? Real-World Protection Test or Malware Protection Test or Advanced Threat Protection Test?

In that same order you wrote them. Real Protection > Malware Protection > Advanced Threat Protection.
Though performance impact and false positives are important factors too. Like, the only reason I stopped using Microsoft Defender after a long time (at least for now) is some of the performance impact that I was having. I was fine with its protection.

 

[Parkinsond]

the only reason I stopped using Microsoft Defender after a long time (at least for now) is some of the performance impact that I was having. I was fine with its protection

I have Avast active currently, but I use MD most of time; it is as light as K and Avast; only B and SEP which caused some slow down; I have no experience with the paid solutions.

 

[SeriousHoax]

I have Avast active currently, but I use MD most of time; it is as light as K and Avast; only B and SEP which caused some slow down; I have no experience with the paid solutions.

MD is slow for some specific things. Mostly it's fine when using and running reputable signed apps.

 

[Parkinsond]

MD is slow for some specific things. Mostly it's fine when using and running reputable signed apps.

According to being bundled with ASR rules and/or SAC/WDAC or not; if not, it slows nothing.

 

[SeriousHoax]

According to being bundled with ASR rules and/or SAC/WDAC or not; if not, it slows nothing.

It does. I can say from experience. A recent example would be when I ran Google's IDE Antigravity, MD's CPU usage reached 60% making my CPU fans go crazy for a while as well as the app taking longer to finish loading. The same thing with ESET when run for the first time after installing ESET, ESET's CPU usage reached 18% for 2 seconds, and the app opened normally with no stutter. My CPU fan remains calm. I didn't bother checking CPU usage again after that on the next run.
So MD can heavily impact performance under certain conditions. That was vanilla MD + PUP protection enabled.

 

[Parkinsond]

It does. I can say from experience. A recent example would be when I ran Google's IDE Antigravity, MD's CPU usage reached 60% making my CPU fans go crazy for a while as well as the app taking longer to finish loading. The same thing with ESET when run for the first time after installing ESET, ESET's CPU usage reached 18% for 2 seconds, and the app opened normally with no stutter. My CPU fan remains calm. I didn't bother checking CPU usage again after that on the next run.
So MD can heavily impact performance under certain conditions. That was vanilla MD + PUP protection enabled.

Of couse I might be wrong; my experience is so limited; I have very few number of non-demanding apps, may be the browser is the most demanding among all of them.

I stopped using heavy apps such as Photoshop and SPSS very long time ago.

 

[lokamoka820]

Like, the only reason I stopped using Microsoft Defender after a long time (at least for now) is some of the performance impact that I was having.

Out of curiosity, what are you using now?

 

[simmerskool]

skimming thru the pdf report, Eset seemed somewhat downplayed yet it was 1 of 3 that got Advanced+ in all 7 tests during the year.

 

[Wrecker4923]

I have Avast active currently, but I use MD most of time; it is as light as K and Avast; only B and SEP which caused some slow down; I have no experience with the paid solutions.

may be the browser is the most demanding among all of them

I’m mostly in the same boat. I use MD on my main systems, which I feel impacts memory less. I use Avast (Hardened mode) on a shared, occasionally-used system since it impacts system startup, login, and monthly system updates less than Bitdefender (which I might have preferred, except for the huge updates).

I suppose what you experience would depend on how you use your system; YMMV.

 

[bazang]

The above "Disclaimer" means:

1. The results apply only to the test environment.
2. The results apply only to the test system configuration(s) of both the OSes and security software tested.
3. The results apply only to the threats (e.g. the specific malware or other threats tested).
4. The results CANNOT be extrapolated beyond any of these "boundaries" or "specific limitations."

Yet, people will read and - very wrongly interpret - the "5 Stars and All Green Bars" and extrapolate that to protection that will keep them safe. The AV companies know this and exploit this people psychology and thinking failure. That is why AV companies pay huge amounts of money to have their software tested. It is marketing and propaganda. Combine that with people who have no understanding of the tests and that test result marketing generates revenue for the security software companies.

 

[Divine_Barakah]

I have Avast active currently, but I use MD most of time; it is as light as K and Avast; only B and SEP which caused some slow down; I have no experience with the paid solutions.

MD is slow for some specific things. Mostly it's fine when using and running reputable signed apps.

MD runs fine most of the time, but not if you have folders that includes tens of installation files. In that case you can clearly see the icons take up to min to load.

Another area is using external HDD. The stored files and folders there take time to appear and one of the most annoying thing is I cannot safely eject thr external HDD when running MD, I keep getting the error message that the drive is still in use and this never happens when running a 3rd party solution.

 

[Parkinsond]

Another area is using external HDD. The stored files and folders there take time to appear and one of the most annoying thing is I cannot safely eject thr external HDD when running MD

I get this only if I have deleted files stored on ext HDD, only few seconds delay to ejectability.

MD runs fine most of the time, but not if you have folders that includes tens of installation files

How frequent you need to open a folder full of installation files? For me, just once after W install, and may be every month or few months when a new release of installer is downloaded.

 

[Parkinsond]

I’m mostly in the same boat. I use MD on my main systems, which I feel impacts memory less. I use Avast (Hardened mode) on a shared, occasionally-used system since it impacts system startup, login, and monthly system updates less than Bitdefender (which I might have preferred, except for the huge updates).

My favorite first party and third party AVs too.

 

[Divine_Barakah]

I get this only if I have deleted files stored on ext HDD, only few seconds delay to ejectability.

How frequent you need to open a folder full of installation files? For me, just once after W install, and may be every month or few months when a new release of installer is downloaded.

Regularly as I keep copies of installation files for offline use. I also have lifetime licenses to a certain versions of software that I need to keep as upgrades are not included.


I also need to connect the external HDD on a daily basis for backups.

I believe this issue stems from the fact that MD does not properly do cache.

Another problem I noticed is the CPU spike during installing a program, the MD process uses up to %48 cpu.

This is on default settings. I believe using Andy's tool to configure Defender would result in a worse performance hit.

 

[Parkinsond]

This is on default settings. I believe using Andy's tool to configure Defender would result in a worse performance hit.

Agree; the reason I am with Avast currently; overall performance is slightly better than with MD bundled with ASR rules and WDAC, with a better FW management as a free gift.

 

[LinuxFan58]

I have a neighbor who also is a good acquaintance. He knows about security because he checks the AV-Test and AV-Compartives results from time to time (or put it differently he is security aware). He also likes to push his solution to others (and as far as I know has convinced at least three other neighbors).

We organize a yearly street summer party on 'neigboursday' (in the Netherlands the fourth saturday in September). First time we sat together to organize it, I noticed he had both Bitdefender and Avast icon showing up in his system tray. I told him it was generally not a good idea to run two AV's, but he told me he ran Bitdefender free with Avast BB + ransomware + firewall (so they did not bite each other but complimented each other).

As far as I can remember he is running this dual setup for years. Because I raised the concern about the 2 AV's, he likes to remember me (both teasingly and triumphantly) that they still run fine together (and of course I am silly using Linux without an AV).

 

[Parkinsond]

I have a neighbor who also is a good acquaintance. He knows about security because he checks the AV-Test and AV-Compartives results from time to time (or put it differently he is security aware). He also likes to push his solution to others (and as far as I know has convinced at least three other neighbors).

We organize a yearly street summer party on 'neigboursday' (in the Netherlands the fourth saturday in September). First time we sat together to organize it, I noticed he had both Bitdefender and Avast icon showing up in his system tray. I told him it was generally not a good idea to run two AV's, but he told me he ran Bitdefender free with Avast BB + ransomware + firewall (so they did not bite each other but complimented each other).

As far as I can remember he is running this dual setup for years. Because I raised the concern about the 2 AV's, he likes to remember me (both teasingly and triumphantly) that they still run fine together (and of course I am silly using Linux without an AV).

This is an exceptional situation.
For the record, K has a free product "Kaspersky Anti-Ransomware Tool".
It's supposed to run alongside any other AV.
When tried with Avast free, it caused OS crash.
Not to speak about two full AVs with real-time protection on for both.