PC World: 13 security solutions tested by AV-Test

It gives an indication of misinformation, if nothing else. G Data 4.24% ? Yeah, right. When the engines it uses gets 65-85%...

 

This is for Zero-Day malware, disadvantage for Gdata
This is daily Summary http://www.shadowserver.org/wiki/pmwiki.php/Stats/VirusDailyStats
and This is Yearly http://www.shadowserver.org/wiki/pmwiki.php/Stats/VirusYearlyStats
but this does not give you a rough idea of the complete detection

 

symantec not there ??

 

Zyrtec , I am really interested ... in which AV-Comparatives (www.av-comparatives.org) recent test you have seen ESET with great results so that it (ESET) can be considered "one of the top ties AVs" ?

Let's have a look at the last dynamic one : ESET misses 77 samples compared to just 21 missed samples from the first ones.

PUAs test: ESET misses 1886 samples compared to just 21 from the first one

In the performance test - There are many more companies and products above ESET than below ESET.

In the regular on-demand test : ESET's NOD32 in right in the middle with middle results compared to the competition in the test.

You'd better open your eyes - ESET is no longer what it used to be - no longer the fastest , no longer one of the best hunters and no longer top-notch product . ESET is now an average security product with medium average results. Protection can't be achieved with medium results. Medium is not enough. Being number 1 is what matters.

AV-Test.org is considered bigger organisation with more resourses than AVC . AV-Test is part of AMTSO (http://www.amtso.org/members.html) and its results are true. As for the Virus Total , you should not compare detection based on VT static on-demand scan. If it might work with some classic AV product , most products nowadays (top detection and protection products) do include behaviour analysis as well as other protection/detection measures that ESET misses , as well as VT scans.

 

I have noticed with these tests one thing is common to them all:-If a members fav product does well then of course the tests are correct and to be believed,if on the other hand a members fav product does badly then the tests are worthless and the methods used dubious,same result carries over if a product a member dislikes for any reason does well then the tests are not to be believed,doesn't matter who or what body runs these tests the above results hold true every time!