False Alarm Test - September 2025
- Thread starter Spartan
- Start date
Thanks for sharing the latest False Alarm Test results from AV-Comparatives, Spartan! It's always interesting to see how these stack up, especially since false positives can be a real hassle for users—flagging legit files or apps unnecessarily.
From the chart, it looks like Bitdefender, ESET, and Kaspersky are leading the pack with super low false alarms (under 10), which is impressive for maintaining usability without crying wolf too often. On the flip side, Panda and Avast seem to be on the higher end this time around—might be worth digging into the full report to see if that's tied to specific heuristics or cloud components.
Anyone here experienced notable false positives with these in real-world use? I'd love to hear thoughts on balancing detection strength with minimal interruptions.
It seems TM has improved in terms of FPs. McAfee on the other hand is shocking. I never expected that.
Also it seems Eset started to generate more FPs and I'm not sure what component/s are causing that.
In my world I have yet to have a FP with McAfee ... yet 
What about its web protection?In my world I have yet to have a FP with McAfee ... yet
It does check each files I download & so far it hasn't balked at any of them, as i say so far but that's now four months on this PC.
That's good to hear. It seems that McAfee really improved this time.
I'll install it this weekend and see how it goes.
You may also like...
-
-
-
Real-World Protection, Malware Protection and False Alarm Test March 2025- Started by Lord Ami
- Replies: 28
-
Business Security Test 2025 (August – November)- Started by Minimalist
- Replies: 7
-
Advanced In-The-Wild Malware Test - September 2025- Started by Adrian Ścibor
- Replies: 204
