AV-Comparatives: Real-World Protection Test - May 2017

AV-Comparatives: Real-World Protection Test - May 2017

http://chart.av-comparatives.org/chart1.php?chart=chart2&year=2017&month=5&sort=1&zoom=3

https://www.av-comparatives.org/dynamic-tests/

 

Keeping an eye on AVG, especially with all the deals available.
And, of course, Microsoft.
Not a great month for Eset.

 

Avast, Avg, Kaspersky

 

[QUOTE="... Not a great month for Eset.[/QUOTE]

WOW! No kidding. Bullguard with better results than Eset? Who would have thunk it.

 

Anyone heard of Seqrite? I had to look that one up. It is endpoint security and it advertises on its site using the WannaCry watchword. Based on this, it has a ways to go. Does anyone have any experience with this product? It seems to be just released.

http://www.seqrite.com/

 

Tests were run on Win 7 x64. Same would not be the case on Win 10.

 

Seqrite (is Quick Heal's Enterprise Security brand).
https://www.wilderssecurity.com/thr...ction-test-february-2017.392740/#post-2660198
https://www.wilderssecurity.com/threads/real-world-protection-test-march-2017.393327/#post-2670185

 

So what. The test was run on Win7, not Win 10.

 

@anon: Alrightee, then.

 

Okay I take my words back on avast never coming on top 5 in AV-C....they did the improbable

 

What does the yellow bar saying user dependant mean? Emsisoft did horrible here despite it using its own engine and the Bitdefender Engine. What gives?

 

Wow, Microsoft better than Avira! Great performance for Avast, AVG, and the usual Kaspersky...

 

I noticed that. It if keeps up I may just go with WD!

 

Indeed!

 

PDF, page 5:

 

You won't be the only one.

 

I am sure.

 

The user dependant line keeps on growing for emsisoft

 

The point, since many years, is: a not too high score antivirus with an HIPS or a BB is much more effective than the highest score av.

 

Not a problem as long as you follow the recommended action upon detection.

 

It seems that, sooner than later, MS will end up eating all others up...

 

I don't like the scoring just for the fact, that if a AV solution gives the user a chance to decide if the detection should be blocked, it
is damn near a fail or a miss. It beats having to restore the app or software due to a false removal or quarantine.
EmsiSoft belongs at the top of that list, I am sig-less so it really does not effect me, but imho it is a misleading way to
score software that allows the user have a say.
The average user (most likely) wont read the legend to see what that yellow line
denotes , Oh well.

 

It is a good thing that MS is improving, the best way to keep the others on their toes...

 

Exactly. I thought with the bitdefender engine itself it should score the same and then the bb should kick in for the unknown items. The others are scoring 99+ without any user intervention.

 

You can encounter false positives if you follow recommended action by default. It's better to use it selectively after checking information in prompt.