Malware Protection Test September 2022 File Detection Test with Execution including false alarm test https://www.av-comparatives.org/tests/malware-protection-test-september-2022/ Chart: https://www.av-comparatives.org/com...=2022&chart_month=9&chart_sort=1&chart_zoom=2
I was surprised to see all of the products that start with ""A" get 90%+ scores in the offline test. It sucks to be Trend Micro.
That graph is misleading--overly emphasizing in bright orange against dark grey that Trend Micro missed 2.59%. It got a score of 97.41%, not that far off from the others. But it's drama to put it in your face the "glaring shortcomings." This has always been a bug-a-boo of mine, how graphs can mess with your perception of a given result. Where are the false-positves? Oh yeah, the unobtrusive, easy-to-miss little boxes with less color-contrast near the bottom. Hmmm.
I also meant the 41.1% offline detection rate. The worst of the bunch. By a good amount. P.S.---I do agree with you about the way graphs are used.
Details about the discovered false alarms (including their assumed prevalence) can be seen in the separate report available at: False Alarm Test September 2022. https://www.av-comparatives.org/tests/malware-protection-test-september-2022/ https://www.av-comparatives.org/com...=2022&chart_month=9&chart_sort=1&chart_zoom=2
I agree with that. You have to set aspect ratio 0-100% to get realistic visual comparison, so the "correct" link to graph would be: https://www.av-comparatives.org/com...=2022&chart_month=9&chart_sort=1&chart_zoom=0
They are a vendor that constantly remove definition from their signatures. Their signature size on the device is merely 40 MB or close to that. The full size of the signature is over 1 GB that can be used in their Enterprise products if required. Even without that, they missed the most in the test. They are bottom with missing 259 followed by Malwarebytes with 19. There's a huge gap in between
Quite a lot of false positives from Win Defender! But at least it failed to detect only 1 sample, while Kaspersky failed 4 times. Malwarebytes also dropped the ball with 19 misses. And Trend Micro seems to be a complete joke, 259 misses. Are these guys for real?
Over the course of many tests, there seems to be a possible pattern with Trend. A common "trend"? On some tests they have scored high, often 100% protection, But on those tests it also usually has a high FP count. On other tests they score well below that success rate, but in those tests the FP count is also noticeably lower. It looks like they are always trying to find the "golden mean" that will allow the product to score fairly high with a minimum of FPs. A moving target that they seem to keep missing.,
It's worth noting as well that Trend Micro has scored 100% or 99.9% for blocking on AV-Comparatives Real-World Protection tests for a long time. AVC provides useful history charts for each product that allow seeing its progress over time. https://www.av-comparatives.org/vendors/trend-micro/ At the bottom is the section "Trend Micro's progress" You can see the results of each test series over time, with a horizontal scrollbar to move to the left and look back in time. The product has had solid results in the Real-World Protection, but less than stellar results in the Malware Protection tests. It's strength appears to be in blocking malware from getting onto the computer in the first place.
To be honest, I don't know why AV Comparatives makes it so hard to decipher all of this info, I get a headache just by looking at it, horrible stuff. And I wonder if it's true what you said, because this would mean that Trend Micro is good in blocking malicious URL's, while that shouldn't be the main reason why you install an AV. An AV should simply block malware no matter how it's delivered to the machine. So Trend Micro stays crap in my view.
Ya, but the problem is variance. Look at prior month's results and you will find that TM had decent results. Hard to fathom that there could be that much change from ok to awful. Again, we need to find why there is so much variance. Not a fan of TM by any means-but still...
You probably checked the Real-World protection of the previous month. Trend does well at Real-World protection tests of AVC except false-positives, but miss a lot in the Malware Protection test. It missed 140 in the previous one.
