[Tracefl0w]

AV-Comparatives Real World Protection Test - June 2019

Greeting everyone!

I've seen that there are many questions regarding the best anti virus software, while each one of them differs it usually comes down to the real world tests of the software. I tend to tell clients that you, yourself is the best anti-virus protection you can have. However if we're going to look at an real world comparsion, then I can assure you that this is the test. This test shows how an antivirus behaves with certain threats, in a specific environment and under certain conditions. I'd strongly advise you to consider factors such as price, ease of use, compatibility and support, what's "best" usually differs from individual to individual.

The RealWorld Protection test is a joint project of AV-Comparatives and the University of Innsbruck’s Faculty of Computer Science and Quality Engineering. It is partially funded by the Republic of Austria and it has won many awards.

The methodology of our Real-World Protection Test has received the following awards and certifications, including:

• Constantinus Award – given by the Austrian government
  
• Cluster Award – given by the Standortagentur Tirol – Tyrolean government
  
• eAward – given by report.at (Magazine for Computer Science) and the Office of the Federal Chancellor
  
• Innovationspreis IT – “Best Of” – given by Initiative Mittelstand Germany
  

Personally, I was surprised because it looks like Microsoft's Windows Defender has claimed massively, definitely worth using over other AVs now.
I personally use Windows defender and Malwarebytes, they seem to work well and compliment each other nicely. It's also free by the way.

Link to article: https://www.av-comparatives.org/tests/re...-may-2019/

[Drako]

Yeah that's surprising to see Windows Defender at such a high rank. And I'm sure we've all doubted the capability of Windows Defender, but I didn't expect that. I use AVG and I thought it'd be in the Advanced+ rank, but it still does its job. At least we have a test as high of caliber as this to prove the strength of these AVs.

[mothered]

Yeah that's surprising to see Windows Defender at such a high rank.

I didn't think much of Windows Defender, but It's significantly Improved over the years to where It stands today, at Windows 10.

It's actually detected and removed malicious content from my systems, that other leading AVs failed to do.

[Dismas]

I'm curious what they tested with. Generally speaking, I'd expect to see more varied results for protection rates.

[Tracefl0w]

I'm curious what they tested with. Generally speaking, I'd expect to see more varied results for protection rates.

They did outline the test procedures in the linked article, just below the tested AV list. Why did you expect to see more varied results for the protection rates? Most AVs today have reached some kind of plateau where most of the major AV companies are equivalent and offer roughly the same protection. It's quite evident in the results published, they all scored 98% and upwards, which is a pass in my eyes.

[Tracefl0w]

Yeah that's surprising to see Windows Defender at such a high rank.

I didn't think much of Windows Defender, but It's significantly Improved over the years to where It stands today, at Windows 10.

It's actually detected and removed malicious content from my systems, that other leading AVs failed to do.

Couldn't agree more, Microsoft has certainly stepped up their game with the antivirus. Windows Defender also works based on a reputation-based protection, where the files are marked as safe if they have a sufficient amount of users. Other unsafe executable are blocked if they don't have a sufficient number of users, which in this case would lead to a huge amount of false positives which is great for blocking new malware, hence the efficiency.

[Tracefl0w]

Yeah that's surprising to see Windows Defender at such a high rank. And I'm sure we've all doubted the capability of Windows Defender, but I didn't expect that. I use AVG and I thought it'd be in the Advanced+ rank, but it still does its job. At least we have a test as high of caliber as this to prove the strength of these AVs.

Well, if my mind serves me correctly Avast bought AVG some time ago, they're essentially the same program now which can be seen to a certain extent in the linked report.

[Drako]

Yeah that's surprising to see Windows Defender at such a high rank. And I'm sure we've all doubted the capability of Windows Defender, but I didn't expect that. I use AVG and I thought it'd be in the Advanced+ rank, but it still does its job. At least we have a test as high of caliber as this to prove the strength of these AVs.

Well, if my mind serves me correctly Avast bought AVG some time ago, they're essentially the same program now which can be seen to a certain extent in the linked report.

Oh yeah they did buy AVG. I forgot all about that. Of course that would extend over to AVGs side if Avast is now running it.

[mothered]

Oh yeah they did buy AVG. I forgot all about that.

It makes sense why AVG has also Improved over the years.

It was a terrible AV back In early 2000.

[Dismas]

I'm curious what they tested with. Generally speaking, I'd expect to see more varied results for protection rates.

They did outline the test procedures in the linked article, just below the tested AV list. Why did you expect to see more varied results for the protection rates? Most AVs today have reached some kind of plateau where most of the major AV companies are equivalent and offer roughly the same protection. It's quite evident in the results published, they all scored 98% and upwards, which is a pass in my eyes.

Expected ESET and F-Secure to outperform the competitors. I also expected McAfee and Defender to have much worse results.