badgolferman wrote:

> It's hard for me to believe Kaspersky and Eset are ranked so low on
> that chart.  Then there are ones like ULIS, Kromtech, Avetix rated
> higher than any!

The problem with such charts is they are tracking by brand or product
name, not by engine producer.  Avetix uses the BitDefender engine.
Gdata uses Avast and BitDefender.  Kingsoft uses Avira's engine.  Eset
NOD32 uses their own Threatsense engine.  If AV vendors were up front as
to which AV engine(s) they use then comparison and testing sites could
rank those engines rather than test multiple products that use the same
engine(s).

Those brands using someone else's scanner engines don't advertise that
fact because it makes consumers aware that their product relies on
someone else's engine.  Those consumers might decide to go with products
from the source of those engine(s).  Sometimes but not often enough the
AV engine sources will issue press releases about some other brand
integrating their AV engine (e.g., http://tinyurl.com/9453ja3).

It is not enough to look at just the current test results for an anti-
virus product.  Just because one is high today today mean it has been in
the past or will be in the future.  Lots of these type of programs fade
away in a year.  At Virus Bulletin, it's easy to see a history of their
test results on any AV product.  For example (click on the bottom link
to show full history):

Avira
https://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/archive/vendor?id=37

Avast
https://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/archive/vendor?id=9

BitDefender
https://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/archive/vendor?id=11

Eset
https://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/archive/vendor?id=14

The graph at the top indicates how long the product has been around
(assuming the AV vendor allows VBTN to publish their test results).  Now
look at how little history there is for Ulis Adept and WonTok:

Avetex
https://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/archive/vendor?id=596

Ulis
https://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/archive/vendor?id=593

Wontok
https://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/archive/vendor?id=580

They're new.  They have no history.  You haven't a clue if they will be
good because you can't see a history of their products.  Are they are
shining star or a momentary meteor?

I know of no way at av-comparatives.org to see a history of how a
particular product performed across multiples of their testing across
many months or years.  I prefer to use a proven performer rather than a
flash in the pan.
--- NewsGate v1.0 gamma 2