AV-Comparatives Heuristic / Behaviour Test 2014

For me this is the best test, and I'm sad to see that will be no longer available for public
With this test we can see really how good is a AV that is not only footprint
The best example is Lavasoft compared to Bitdefender:
same footprint but different engine. There are 320 malware that BD block and AdAware let pass

 

IBK, thanks for making it clear.

 

Oh right, thanks for clarifying IBK

 

Bitdefender continues to impress me. I just wonder what the free version would do even though it's no longer in development and not a Internet Security product.

 

Thanks @IBK

Daniel

 

IBK - ” Kudos shoudl go to the vendors that are not heavily marketing-driven and who participate publicly in tests, ect. ” - agree, because hide and seek is only real funny at the playground . . .

 

I don't blame avast! (or AVIRA) for not being included. They are both aware of their proactive (or lack of it) functionality, because as far as i know they both work on rather radical designs that should significanly improve things. So why doing the test you already know you'll suck in it? Say whatever you want but bad PR is a bad PR. And if you straight know it it will be bad, why even bother? No one who is sane enough would go and do that on purpose. Especially not if you have people to pay and company to run.

The question now is, will they improve things to a point where they will be confident enough. avast! has been sending their FREE version to test against other paid AV's as a proof they are confident and want to show their FREE offering is just as good as stuff that costs money. And that's the mentioned confidence. But it hasn't been this way forever. Same might change when they release NG tech and finally start the Dyna-Gen in its full glory. Then we'll see how they'll do in proactive tests. Because i'm quite certain they will then participate publicly in the test.

 

AFAIK it costs money to be tested. Ergo, why pay money to obtain bad PR?

OTOH, I wonder what percent of AV buyers even look at tests before buying?

 

.

The amount it's peanuts for an AV company.
--------

The minority.
The majority will see the AV-C, VB100, AV-Test logo on the front page.

i.e.
http://www.pandasecurity.com/usa/homeusers/solutions/antivirus/
AV-C, VB100, AV-Test, Chip, ICSA labs, etc.

http://www.avira.com/en/avira-free-antivirus
AV-C, VB100, Chip, ICSA labs......

http://www.bitdefender.com/solutions/total-security.html
"leaves your device spotless” Andreas Marx, CEO AV Test, January 2014
“smallest possible impact on your PC performance” Andreas Marx, CEO AV Test, January 2014

etc.

That counts mostly for the AV companies, IMHO.

 

there are no extra costs in participating in it for those who are already in the main-testseries.

 

Funny how they nearly ALWAYS leave out avast! in PR comparison charts. Makes you wonder why... Too good and free? They seem to always include AVG heh...

 

More like avast avoided this year knowing they didn't do anything to improve on the MSE-like results in last years' test.

 

Who is "they" in this context?

 

See Bitdefenders webpage...

 

Well done! BD & Kaspersky

 

Eset 122 compromised, Emsisoft 39 compromised.
Emsisoft has probably less pop-ups when connected to the internet.

 

I didn´t know that heuristics were that powerful, quite impressing.