Malware-Hub testing shows additionally how strong are dynamic modules like BB, HIPS, HEUR, it isn't only signature based testing, that must be said to avoid wrong things, but you probably don't like to agree as always for similar discussions about Malware-Hub...
Modules don't matter, if the malware magically appears on the desktop, which is the real flaw of malwarehub & youtester tests.
There is no such thing as a malware appearing in the desktop out of nowhere. You have to consider the attack vectors:
1- Downloaded/executed from the browser.
2- removable devices.
3- Emails attachments.
4- Networks shares.
5- legit installers compromised.
6- remote shells
For a test be accurate, the malware must be imported via one of those vectors while the product is active, and if so, it must be mentioned.
Not saying, i dont even consider a test made in a VM accurate, use a dedicated machine.
Anything else, whatever you say, can't be labelled as accurate (even if in some cases it can be close), it is just toying.
Personally, I would say that all mentioned tests are NOT really accurate to reflect "real world" how people getting infected, so it isn't wrong at all!
You know my point of view about test, especially those "independent & professional" labs...