Some general consideration about comparative tests.
There was a time when participating in comparative tests could demonstrate the actual capacity of an AV and show you its pros and cons compared to other products.
However, a gap has gradually emerged between the methodology used in the tests, the characteristics of the new malware and the technology used by an antivirus.
An important issue is related to the alleged state of “independence” of the various testing labs. The marketing component of these tests has an big impact on the real levels of safety for users that implicitly trust the results. The market is full of products technologically not so strong, but an average user can blindly believe these tests that bring that product to the top
Keep in mind that no methodology of antivirus testing is able to properly compare a software so complex as an antivirus.
Statistical tests can be useful for someone, but primarily they are created for the interests of some vendors.
Every AV/Suite that seems to do well in the hub also seems to do well on AV-TEST. It's really good to see CIS performing well on AV-TEST and Kaspersky continues to be consistent just as it has done for a very long time. It's also great to see MS doing well.