Marcos
Bad result?
I don't see any bad results there but there's definitely an issue with the methodology.
As for the urls, it appears to be there were no malicious ones that were not blocked by ESET but those not blocked was mainly fresh phishing from today which was not blocked at that time by any AV.
As for the on-demand scan "test", I "like" tests where one puts all mess (benign files, apps with Chinese gui, PUAs, etc.) into a folder, then scans the files and presents undetected files as misses
AVs that detect such files have FPs and should be penalized for that but in these "tests" they get good points for detecting FPs.
A credible tester should know what he or she has in the test set, should be able to distinguish malware from PUAs, greyware and other benign applications and remove such from the test set. Including non-malicious files usually substantially skews the final results.
Also note that on-demand scans do not reflect the real-world scenario. In real world, malware is usually downloaded by malicious scripts on compromised websites or spread by spammed email. Running just an on-demand scan cannot test other protection layers that might have prevented the malware from being downloaded and executed.
This software needs a bit of tweaking to offer a great protecting level 
