I think a very small amount of badware are now viruses as I remember under 10% most are other evilware?
You can't rely only in proactive modules, mainly home users that are not common from being infected by a real zero day malware.Eset relies on signatures all the time. If a malware past slip it's real time module, system would be infected ( no fight back).
Emsi though expensive on other hand, but it's better hips is recommendable over Eset..
I say better 0 day protection from E.S over Eset.
By the way signatures are not my cup of tea.
I prefer an AV that fights 90/100 unknwn malware proactively, than an AV that detects 90/100 by signatures and allow the rest to infect the system.
Other choices Norton, G data, Kaspersky.. Just use each trials.
Agreed.You can't rely only in proactive modules, mainly home users that are not common from being infected by a real zero day malware.
Eset has advantage on being the first to include new malware signatures, and that's essencial to remove and clean infected PCs, or even blocked intrusion attempts. Moreover, it has a great firewall and excellent heuristics (detecting variants of malware).
Of course would be better if you can choose a complete suite who's better on both (proactive and signatures), like Kaspersky or Norton, but that's not the case.
Signatures are important, otherwise we would use only proactive defense.