A.S.K

Level 1
There are many antivirus which may not perform well in avtest.org and avcomparatives tests but users may give positive response with there own experience can you share those information.
 

Parsh

Level 24
Trusted
Malware Hunter
Verified
Webroot. It has some aggressive settings and process control options.
Webroot seems to not submit it's product for testing on any of these 2 labs. Anyways, it is a wonderful antivirus. It was developed to be complementary but does quite better!

Av-test.org provides a 6-point rating besides the detailed percentages inside) and almost all good antivirus rate a 5.5 or 6.
I wouldn't go for a mindspin in case of Av-comparatives.org. It represents a more intuitive comparision among the products and the results seen to continuously vary with time and category (proactive/file detection/etc).
Not to say that all of those tests depict the absolute truth. Effectiveness change with configuration, time and the malware evolution.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Wouldn't trust a AV that got sub par scores in Av tests. Using AV's that don't test well is bad.

Sure you can argue with Av tests methods but the end results are almost the same across the board.

You want a Av with a large reputation service. More samples = more detection's.

I only trust a few Av companies. Kaspersky, Norton, F-Secure, Emsosift, Bitdefender, Avira, Avast.

The rest are not worth my time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: A.S.K
M

MalwareBlockerYT

Wouldn't trust a AV that got sub par scores in Av tests. Using AV's that don't test well is bad.

Sure you can argue with Av tests methods but the end results are almost the same across the board.

You want a Av with a large reputation service. More samples = more detection's.

I only trust a few Av companies. Kaspersky, Norton, F-Secure, Emsosift, Bitdefender, Avira, Avast.

The rest are not worth my time.
Hold your horses there. You only trust those 7 AVs? There are lots of good AV companies & the majority of the ones that exist are good quality & deserve more respect - 360 Total Security, MalwareBytes V3, ESET, Sophos, etc are all good AVs which you don't trust? I would trust ESET & MalwareBytes over Norton, Avira & F-Secure.
 
I forgot Eset and Hitman Pro/Surfright (Sophos now) on that list. And maybe Trend Micro. I trust them.

The rest are either poor detection or use the same AV engine as the ones I listed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: A.S.K and Parsh

Fritz

Level 11
I consider F-Secure very underrated. No slowdowns, very quiet, no constant reminders that it's there and doing its job.

Unfortunately, also few buttons which certainly makes it less attractive to AV geeks, leading to almost no coverage in security-related online communities.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tadas247 and A.S.K

Cortex

Level 8
I think the latest version of Trend is really good, Eset too but I've been running Panda Anti-Virus Pro for some months along with other protection & most impressed with it - All singing, all dancing AV's with many add-ons are not my cup of tea. (if you like tea that is)

I was a fan of Webroot for quite some time but the amount of space monitoring took up at times was staggering, whether that's changed in the last few months I don't know but slow whitelisting was my main issue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: A.S.K

Exterminator

Community Manager
Staff member
Verified
Windows Defender in Windows 10.
Of course the strength of Windows 10 security relies on all of it's parts,UAC,Windows Firewall & SmartScreen along with Windows Defender.
Then again the same could be said for any other AV running on Windows as UAC,Windows Firewall & Smartscreen add to the security.
Underated and often bashed it has become much better in Windows 10.
 
  • Like
Reactions: A.S.K