This document may be reprinted free of charge but the source must be stated and the AV-TEST GmbH

logo must be displayed.

1

27 Security Products Put to the Test
The Ultimate Endurance Test
for Internet Security Suites

Over the past 22 months, all of the well-known
security suites available on the German market
have had to undergo laboratory tests and prove
just how secure they really are. Germanys
largest test laboratory for anti-virus software,
AV-TEST GmbH, examined the market leaders
with regard to their security when used with
Windows operating systems.
Markus Selinger
Nowadays, anyone who uses a Windows PC
online without any protection software can
expect to be attacked by malware at any time. If
you dont believe this, you should take a look at
the following figures:
Over 95 million pieces
of malware are
currently active on the
Internet and are joined
by 100,000 new threats
every day. The fact that
a year contains around
31.5 million seconds
means that you could
capture three different
pieces of malware
every second and have
still never found the
same piece twice by
the end of the year.
If you use a good
Internet security suite,
however, you normally
wont even notice such malware attacks because
they simply bounce off the protective barrier
and are immediately isolated. Protection
programs usually only inform users that such
incidents have already been dealt with.
In this report, we will tell you which Internet
security suite will provide you with the best
protection and explain why this is the case.
While other tests in magazines or on online
portals are only based on data recorded at a
given moment in time, the test results presented
in this report were obtained from an endurance
test run on 27 security products by Germanys
Pieces of Malware Identified in the Last 10 Years: Over 95 Million




This document may be reprinted free of charge but the source must be stated and the AV-TEST GmbH logo must be displayed.
2

In the Protection
category, the Internet
security suite from
Bitdefender was able to
gain a very narrow victory
over its rivals after
undergoing 10 tests in 22
months. Its competitors
are, however, just a hairs
breadth behind.
largest anti-virus test laboratory at AV-TEST
GmbH. In this endurance test, 17 security
programs had to undergo up to ten tough
laboratory tests over a period of 22 months.
Another 10 products were also involved in the
endurance test but were either only recently
introduced to the test environment or have not
yet completed many individual tests. These
products are therefore listed in a separate table
later on in the report.
Only the best products are awarded the AV-TEST
certificate for certified security and allowed to
display it on their product packaging or website.
What was actually tested?
All of the protection programs were tested in the
AV-TEST laboratory. An essential aspect of the
test was the fact that all products always had to
be tested simultaneously. By doing so, we were
able to ensure that the status of all update files
and similar factors was on the same timescale as
that of all of the other products being tested.
The test was also divided up into three
categories:
Protection
Repair
Usability

The test procedure in each of these categories
was as follows:
Protection: This test category contains a number
of different sub-categories, the most important of
which is the test against current online threats
from so-called 0-day malware. These threats
concern malware that has only just been
discovered and is therefore brand new. Around
150,000 pieces of malware from the last two
months are also used to test the software against
the test laboratorys reference set. On top of this,
they are also tested with the top dogs of the
malware world: around 1500 to 5000 extremely
widespread and malicious files.
You can also read about the precise test
procedure used in this category online at
www.av-test.org/en/test-procedures/test-
modules/protection.
Which program versions were tested?
The fact that the ultimate endurance test
was carried out between January 2011 and
October 2012 meant that different versions
of the well-known protection programs
were tested.
You can access and read about all of the
individual tests on the AV-TEST GmbH
website at www.av-test.org/en/tests/home-
user. The product version tested is specified
for each of these tests together with the
Windows test platform used, which varied
between Windows XP and Windows 7.


This document may be reprinted free of charge but the source must be stated and the AV-TEST GmbH logo must be displayed.
3

Repair: Although this category was disregarded
for a long time, it is now one of the most
important areas tested. After all, a completely
new and unique piece of malware (0-day
malware) may well succeed in slipping through
even the best protection program available. If
this does occur but the malware is detected and
removed shortly afterwards, the protection
software needs to be able to repair any damage
caused. Our tests in this category involved
repeatedly infecting a system with a deactivated
protective function with a variety of different
types of malware around 40 times before
completely cleaning the system. We then
compared the cleaned system with a clean
system backup that had been made before the
test in order to find out whether any dangerous
remnants had been left behind.
You can also find a very detailed description of
this test procedure at www.av-test.org/en/test-
procedures/test-modules/repair.
Usability: Some users may consider this test
category to be unimportant, but this is not the
case. After all, if, for example, a security suite
displays a message that its user is unable to
understand but that requires the user to make a
decision, this could have severe consequences.
On top of this, a product that constantly
produces false positives may irritate users so
much that they ignore a genuine warning and
expose their systems to malware. In the worst-
case scenario, users may even have to deal with
a security program that slows down their
Windows system so much that they chose to
carry out a dangerous security program tuning
measure that deactivates important protective
components. We examine all of these issues in a
separate test in our laboratory.

A detailed explanation of the test procedure
used in this category can also be found online at
www.av-test.org/en/test-procedures/test-
modules/usability.
27 Security Products Put to the Test
The market currently offers around 27 security
products that can be taken seriously. Some of
these are free, while others normally cost
between 30 and 60 Euros for a package for up to
three Windows PCs.
17 of these 27 security programs were
thoroughly examined in a total of 10 tests that
took place between January 2011 and the final
test in October 2012. You can find a list of these
protection programs in the table of overall
results on page 8 of this report. The table
includes a large number of well-known brands
such as Avira, Bitdefender, Kaspersky, Symantec,
No subjective aspects like the
appearance or design of the
protection programs were
evaluated in the "Usability"
category. It can, however, be
noted that all providers now
use the signal colours of red,
amber and green, with green
signalling that everything is in
order, amber indicating
please pay attention and red
warning of an alarm status.

This document may be reprinted free of charge but the source must be stated and the AV-TEST GmbH logo must be displayed.
4

Endurance Test Results
The Best Products in the Protection Category
The best software packages in the Protection category are those
from the manufacturers Bitdefender, F-Secure and G Data, all of
which achieved 5.8 of the maximum of 6.0 points. These products
are very closely followed by the security packages from BullGuard,
Kaspersky and Symantec with 5.7 or 5.6 points. These 6 protection
programs were able to continuously achieve the best results in the
Protection category in 10 tests run between January 2011 and
October 2012 as part of the endurance test carried out by AV-TEST.

Place Company Product Points Number
of Tests
1 Bitdefender Internet Security 5.8 10
1 F-Secure Internet Security 5.8 10
1 G Data Internet Security 5.8 10
2 BullGuard Internet Security 5.7 10
2 Kaspersky Internet Security 5.7 10
3 Symantec Norton Internet Security 5.6 10
4 AVG Internet Security 5.2 10
5 Webroot SecureAnywhere
Complete
4.9 10
5 Trend
Micro
Titanium Maximum
Security
4.9 10
6 PC Tools Internet Security 4.7 10
7 Avast Free Antivirus 4.6 10
7 Avira Internet Security 4.6 10
7 GFI Vipre Antivirus
Premium
4.3 10
8 McAfee Total Protection 4.1 10
9 Norman Security Suite Pro 3.8 10
10 ESET Smart Security 3.6 10
11 Microsoft Security Essentials 2.3 10

ESET or F-Secure, to name but a few providers of
security products available for purchase. The
ultimate endurance test also examined the free
Security Essentials package available from
Microsoft and the free protection program
offered by Avast. The table below therefore also
enables you to compare these products and
decide whether a free protection program would
suit your needs if necessary.
The remaining 10 of the 27 products tested were
either not available on the market at the start of
the test or did not offer a version suitable for use
in the test during the test period. These products
are therefore compared in a separate table at the
end of the report, in which you can also see the
number of tests that were
carried out in order to obtain
the results displayed, which
varies between one to eight
tests.
The Test Category of
"Protection"
In the major category of
Protection, tests were run on
17 protection programs from
Avast, AVG, Avira, Bitdefender,
BullGuard, ESET, F-Secure, G
Data, GFI, Kaspersky, McAfee,
Microsoft, Norman, PC Tools,
Symantec, Trend Micro and
Webroot. The Avast and
Microsoft programs tested are
available to users for free.
A maximum of 6.0 points were
up for grabs in the
Protection category. The top
3 products in this category
were those from Bitdefender,
F-Secure and G Data, all of
which achieved an average of
5.8 of the maximum total of
6.0 points over the 10 tests
that were carried out. These
three products are listed alphabetically in the
table below.
Malware identification test 1: A large number of
other products from well-known brands also
achieved an excellent average points value in
this category despite the fact that the test
requirements were a tough obstacle to
overcome. All candidates initially had to
withstand attacks by 0-day malware. Although
this only involved a selection of around 70 to
100 pieces of malware, these were the newest
and toughest threats around. While the top-
placed programs managed to identify between
98 and 100 percent of these threats, the Security
Essentials from Microsoft allowed an

This document may be reprinted free of charge but the source must be stated and the AV-TEST GmbH logo must be displayed.
5

unacceptable total of up to 32 percent of the
attacks to slip through to the system. Although
the protection program from Microsoft is free,
these results indicate that it only offers users
deceiving security.
Malware identification test 2: All of the test
candidates achieved better results in the second
part of the test, which involved a scan of the AV-
TEST reference set which comprises around
150,000 pieces of malware. Most of the
products performed excellently and were able to
identify 100 percent of the threats, meaning that
they constantly achieved a large number of
points throughout the 10 tests in 22 months.
Only the last five products in the results table
were unable to perform consistently well in the
"Protection category. They achieved good
results in some of the 10 tests and unacceptable
results in others and therefore ended up with a
poor average value on the whole.
Malware identification test 3: The last part of
the test required the products to identify the
crme de la crme of malware: around 1500 to
5000 extremely widespread and malicious files.
Given that these pieces of malware are,
however, extremely well known, almost all of
the programs had no trouble identifying them.
This part of the test is therefore primarily used
to check that the manufacturers also constantly
maintain their products.
Protection Summary
The "Protection category table displays very
clear results. While the top seven spots are
occupied by the protection programs from
Bitdefender, F-Secure, G Data, BullGuard,
Kaspersky, Symantec and AVG, which achieved
consistent results of 5.8 to 5.2 points and were
therefore not far off the top mark of 6.0 points,
the products in the middle of the table are
somewhat less impressive. These packages from
Webroot, Trend Micro, PC Tools, Avast, Avira,
GFI and McAfee achieved less convincing results
of between 4.9 and 4.1 points.
When it comes to these mid-table programs, the
free product from Avast should, however, receive
some credit for its total of 4.6 of a maximum of
6.0 points, which makes it a sufficient solution for
quick protection. Nevertheless, the products in
the top 7 in the table do indeed provide much
better protection.
The lower area of the table contains the
products from ESET, Norman and Microsoft.
These programs achieved values of 3.8, 3.6 and
the worst value of 2.3 points (of a maximum of
6.0) and therefore only provide half of the
protection provided by the top products in some
cases.
The Test Category of Repair
The second major category of "Repair tested
the same 17 products from the "Protection"
For more information, visit www.av-test.org
Germanys largest and independent test
laboratory for anti-virus products also values
transparency. You can therefore find a
precise description of all of our test methods
on our website at: www.av-test.org/en/test-
procedures/test-modules.
This area of our website constantly provides
you with free access to the latest test results
obtained in our laboratory.

The protection program from Kaspersky achieved
particularly impressive results in the Repair
category alongside the Bitdefender Software.

This document may be reprinted free of charge but the source must be stated and the AV-TEST GmbH logo must be displayed.
6

Endurance Test Results
The Best Products in the Repair" Category
The best software in the Repair category comes from the
manufacturer Bitdefender, very closely followed by Kaspersky.
These two protection programs achieved an average of 5.8 and
5.6 points respectively of the total of 6.0 points on offer in 10
tests run between January 2011 and October 2012 as part of the
AV-TEST endurance test.
Place Company Product Points Number
of Tests
1 Bitdefender Internet Security 5.8 10
2 Kaspersky Internet Security 5.6 10
3 Microsoft Security Essentials 4.7 10
4 F-Secure Internet Security 4.6 10
4 AVG Internet Security 4.6 10
4 Avira Internet Security 4.6 10
5 G Data Internet Security 4.5 10
6 Symantec Norton Internet
Security
4.4 10
7 Avast Free Antivirus 4.1 10
8 Webroot SecureAnywhere
Complete
3.9 10
9 Trend
Micro
Titanium Maximum
Security
3.8 10
10 Norman Security Suite Pro 3.6 10
11 GFI Vipre Antivirus
Premium
3.5 10
11 BullGuard Internet Security 3.5 10
12 PC Tools Internet Security 3.2 10
13 McAfee Total Protection 3.0 10
14 ESET Smart Security 2.6 10

category, namely those from Avast, AVG, Avira,
Bitdefender, BullGuard, ESET, F-Secure, G Data,
GFI, Kaspersky, McAfee, Microsoft, Norman, PC
Tools, Symantec, Trend Micro and Webroot. The
Avast and Microsoft programs are available to
users for free.
The maximum points total in this category was also
6.0 points. The top two products in these tests
come from Bitdefender and Kaspersky.
Bitdefender managed to achieve an average of 5.8
over the ten tests carried out to measure the
products' repair performance, while Kaspersky
came in a very close second place with 5.6 of a
maximum of 6.0 points.
The repair performance test: In this test, the
test system is repeatedly contaminated with
active malware such as a rootkit or Trojan
around 40 times. The protection program being
tested is then activated and has to both identify
the malware and completely remove it.
Complete removal of the malware involves the
deletion of all active malware components,
including auxiliary files and other altered data.
The protection program is also expected to
remove entries in the Windows Registry and
repair any other files in the system that may
have been altered or damaged by the malware.
Before being contaminated, the test system is
backed up using the AV-TESTs own special
software Sunshine (more information available
at www.av-test.org/en/products). This backup is
later used for a comparison of the cleaned
system. In an ideal scenario, all
aspects of the tested and
backed-up system should be
identical in this comparison.
Points are deducted for any
deviations.
Repair Summary
The top two products in the
category are without a doubt
the Internet security suites from
Bitdefender and Kaspersky,
which achieved 5.8 and 5.6
points out of 6.0 respectively.
Although the winners in the
Repair category are clear, not
much separates the products in
the middle of the table.
Microsoft came in third place
with a total of 4.7 points and
was followed by F-Secure, AVG
and Avira, all of which achieved
4.6 of a maximum total of 6.0
points. The products from G
Data, Symantec and Avast also
have points totals of over 4.0.
Although Security Essentials
from Microsoft is the best free

This document may be reprinted free of charge but the source must be stated and the AV-TEST GmbH logo must be displayed.
7

Endurance Test Results
The Best Products in the Usability Category

Although the packages from Microsoft and ESET did indeed achieve
the best results in this category, their results in the "Protection"
category are rather poor. The third-placed package from F-Secure and
the protection program from Bitdefender both achieved excellent
results, scoring an average of 5.2 and 5.1 points respectively of the
maximum total of 6.0 points on offer in 10 tests run between January
2011 and October 2012 as part of the AV-TEST endurance test.

Place Company Product Points Number
of Tests
1 Microsoft Security Essentials 5.4 10
2 ESET Smart Security 5.3 10
3 F-Secure Internet Security 5.2 10
4 Bitdefender Internet Security 5.1 10
5 Avast Free Antivirus 5.0 10
5 Symantec Norton Internet
Security
5.0 10
6 Kaspersky Internet Security 4.9 10
7 BullGuard Internet Security 4.7 10
8 GFI Vipre Antivirus
Premium
4.6 10
8 McAfee Total Protection 4.6 10
8 AVG Internet Security 4.6 10
8 Webroot SecureAnywhere
Complete
4.6 10
8 Trend
Micro
Titanium Maximum
Security
4.6 10
9 G Data Internet Security 4.5 10
10 Norman Security Suite Pro 4.2 10
11 Avira Internet Security 4.1 10
12 PC Tools Internet Security 3.9 10

product in terms of repair performance, the fact
that it came in last when identifying malware
shows that its repair ability is not actually very
useful.
The product totals start to decrease to less than
4.0 points at as high as eighth place in the table.
Although the protection program from Webroot
almost makes the 4.0 point mark with its total of
3.9 points, the other products from Trend Micro,
Normal, GFI, BullGuard, PC Tools and McAfee
lower down in the table only achieved totals of
between 3.8 and 3.0 points, while ESET's
software brings up the rear in this category with
just 2.6 points.
The Test Category of Usability
Our laboratory tests the
usability of protection
programs by examining how
they influence a Windows PC,
namely how much they slow
down the system or what
messages they display to the
user. The ten tests in this
major category were again
carried out on the same 17
protection programs from
Avast, AVG, Avira,
Bitdefender, BullGuard, ESET,
F-Secure, G Data, GFI,
Kaspersky, McAfee, Microsoft,
Norman, PC Tools, Symantec,
Trend Micro and Webroot
over a period of 22 months.
A maximum of 6.0 points were
also up for grabs in this
category. The top two
products in terms of usability
are the packages from
Microsoft and ESET, which
achieved 5.4 and 5.3 points
respectively. Although these
results are impressive, the two
programs only achieved
substandard points totals in the Protection
and Repair categories. The products in third,
fourth and (joint) fifth place, namely those from
F-Secure, Bitdefender, Avast and Symantec, also
achieved very good results of between 5.2 and
5.0 out of 6.0.
Usability test 1: We first took a pre-defined test
system with a Windows operating system and
measured its overall performance and a number
of different individual factors such as how long it
took to copy data. We then installed the
protection programs on the system and re-
measured the individual factors. This test was
repeated several times in order to calculate an
average value for the evaluation.
Usability test 2: Every security suite occasionally

This document may be reprinted free of charge but the source must be stated and the AV-TEST GmbH logo must be displayed.
8

Endurance Test Results
The Best Protection Programs in All Categories after 10 Tests in 22 Months
The final table shows that the protection program from Bitdefender achieved an average of 5.6 of a
maximum of 6.0 points in 10 tests run between January 2011 and October 2012 as part of AV-TESTs ultimate
endurance test. The Internet security packages from Kaspersky, F-Secure and Symantec also performed
extremely well and are very close behind Bitdefender with average values of 5.4, 5.2 and 5.0 of a maximum of
6.0 points. The best free product, the protection program from Avast, finished in eighth position with an
average of 4.6 points, while the second free software tested, namely Security Essentials from Microsoft, only
managed twelfth place together with GFI.

Place Company Product Protection Repair Usability Points
Total
Average
Points Values
Number
of Tests
1 Bitdefender Internet Security 5.8 5.8 5.1 16.8 5.6 10
2 Kaspersky Internet Security 5.7 5.6 4.9 16.2 5.4 10
3 F-Secure Internet Security 5.8 4.6 5.2 15.6 5.2 10
4 Symantec Norton Internet
Security
5.6 4.4 5.0 15.0 5.0 10
5 G Data Internet Security 5.8 4.5 4.5 14.7 4.9 10
6 AVG Internet Security 5.2 4.6 4.6 14.4 4.8 10
7 BullGuard Internet Security 5.7 3.5 4.7 13.9 4.6 10
8 Avast Free Antivirus 4.6 4.1 5.0 13.8 4.6 10
9 Webroot SecureAnywhere
Complete
4.9 3.9 4.6 13.4 4.5 10
10 Avira Internet Security 4.6 4.6 4.1 13.3 4.4 10
11 Trend
Micro
Titanium Maximum
Security
4.9 3.8 4.6 13.2 4.4 10
12 GFI Vipre Antivirus
Premium
4.3 3.5 4.6 12.4 4.1 10
12 Microsoft Security Essentials 2.3 4.7 5.4 12.4 4.1 10
13 PC Tools Internet Security 4.7 3.2 3.9 11.7 3.9 10
14 McAfee Total Protection 4.1 3.0 4.6 11.6 3.9 10
14 Norman Security Suite Pro 3.8 3.6 4.2 11.6 3.9 10
15 ESET Smart Security 3.6 2.6 5.3 11.5 3.8 10

displays warning messages to users when they
open harmless software such as a web browser.
Nevertheless, it is important that all security
programs are able to distinguish between
friends and foes in order to avoid false positives
because too many of these would unsettle users.
Usability test 3: The third test in this category
involved installing a large list of safe tools and
programs and recording how the protection software
responds. The fact that all of the software installed is
good and free of malware means that none of the
programs is allowed to be blocked or, in the worst-
case scenario, classified as malware.
Usability Summary
The protection programs from Microsoft and
ESET produced the lowest number of false
positives. These were closely followed by the
Internet security suites from Bitdefender and F-
Secure, which provided consistently good friend
or foe identification throughout the test and
only slightly slowed down the Windows systems.
The top five programs from Microsoft, ESET, F-
Secure, Bitdefender, Avast and Symantec all
achieved good results of between 5.4 and 5.0
points. The products Avast and Symantec
reached the same points average and therefore
share fifth place.
Although they only achieved places six to eleven
in the results table, the programs from
Kaspersky, BullGuard, GFI, McAfee, AVG,
Webroot, Trend Micro, G Data, Norman and

This document may be reprinted free of charge but the source must be stated and the AV-TEST GmbH logo must be displayed.
9

The best free protection program in the
ultimate endurance test run by AV-TEST is
available from Avast. The program, which
achieved 8th place overall, is an ideal solution
for those looking for quick and free
protection. It is above all better than the free
package available from Microsoft.
Avira still produced acceptable scores of
between 4.9 and 4.1 points.
The last product listed in the table, the package
from PC-Tools, achieved an average of 3.9 points
and therefore only just missed out on the middle
range of 4.0 or more of a maximum total of 6.0
points.
The Best Protection Programs in
the Endurance Test
After the 10 tests of Internet security suites
carried out by AV-TEST as part of its ultimate
endurance test in a 22-month period between
January 2011 and October 2012, the Bitdefender
protection program achieved the best score with
an average of 5.6 of a maximum of 6.0 points.
This product constantly performed extremely well
in the "Protection and Repair categories and
was only relegated to fourth place in the
Usability category.
The Bitdefender program was closely followed
by the products from Kaspersky, F-Secure and
Symantec in second, third and fourth place,
which achieved almost equally solid results of
5.4, 5.2 and 5.0 of the maximum possible total of
6.0 points.
The middle of the table, namely places 5 to 12,
contains the products from G Data, AVG,
BullGuard, Avast, Webroot, Avira, Trend Micro,
GFI and Microsoft, all of which achieved average
totals of 4.9 to 4.1 points. The protection
programs from Avast and Microsoft were the
free products tested in this group.
The last four places in the ultimate endurance
test carried out by AV-TEST GmbH go to the
protection programs from PC Tools, McAfee,
Normal and ESET, which achieved points totals
of 3.8 and 3.9.
The overall points totals were calculated from
the points achieved by the products in the
Protection", "Repair" and "Usability" categories.
A maximum of 6.0 points were available in each
category, meaning that the maximum overall
points total available to the products was 18
points.
AV-TEST GmbH awards every product that
achieves at least 11 or more points in a test a
certificate containing a unique and distinctive
number. Most of the products achieved such a
certificate in virtually all of the 10 tests carried
out during the 22-month test period.
11 Sporadic Visitors to the Test Laboratory
Another 10 security programs were also
repeatedly tested in the laboratory throughout
the duration of the test, which lasted from the
beginning of 2011 to October 2012. These
programs did not, however, always have a new
or testable product available for the fixed test
periods. We therefore summarised the results of
these individual tests in a separate table in
which you can find products from Lavasoft,
Ahnlab, AVG (Free Antivirus), Total Defense,
Check Point, Fortinet, K7 Computing and Qihoo
and both the free and purchasable software
available from Panda.

This document may be reprinted free of charge but the source must be stated and the AV-TEST GmbH logo must be displayed.
10

Laboratory Test Results
Protection Programs Sporadically Tested between January 2011 and October 2012
Some of the protection programs performed extremely well in the laboratory tests. The purchasable
version of the Panda software, one of the better-known products in the sporadic tests, completed a
total of eight tests and is one of the top products in the middle of the table when compared with the
endurance test results. The other products in the table below only completed one, two, four or five
tests and therefore cannot be directly compared to the programs in the endurance test and have also
not been ranked.

Company Product Protection Repair Usability Points
Total
Average
Points Values
Number
of Tests
Check Point ZoneAlarm Free
Antivirus +
Firewall
5.3 5.0 5.2 15.5 5.2 3
AVG Anti-Virus Free
Edition
5.0 4.2 4.9 14.1 4.7 5
Panda Internet Security 5.1 4.3 4.4 13.8 4.6 8
Fortinet FortiClient Lite 4.0 3.8 5.3 13.0 4.3 2
K7 Computing Total Security 5.0 4.0 4.0 13.0 4.3 1
Panda Cloud Antivirus
Free Edition
4.6 3.1 5.0 12.7 4.2 5
Qihoo 360 Antivirus 5.4 2.6 4.4 12.4 4.1 5
Lavasoft Ad-Aware Free
Antivirus+
3.3 3.7 4.7 11.7 3.9 3
AhnLab V3 Internet
Security
2.0 4.4 4.2 10.6 3.5 5
Total Defense
(CA)
Internet Security
Suite
2.6 3.1 3.3 9.0 3.0 5

These products were subjected to the same test
procedure as the programs in the endurance test
and were also evaluated in the categories of
Protection, Repair and Usability.
The Test Results
The results of the test candidates that did not
participate in the endurance tests cannot be
compared directly because one product
underwent 8 tests in a period of 22 months
whilst others were only tested in the laboratory
once, twice or four or five times.
The Internet security suite from Panda
completed a total of eight tests and achieved an
average points total of 4.6 out of a maximum of
6.0 points. The purchasable version of the Panda
software would therefore make it into the top 8
of the table of products that completed the
endurance test.
The free product available from Check Point
achieved a good average value of 5.2 points in its
three tests, while the free product version
available from AVG managed to score an
average of 4.7 points in five tests.
These results cannot, however, be directly
compared with those achieved by the
participants in the endurance test, which indeed
completed a total of 10 tests. This separate table
of sporadically tested products therefore does
not contain a product ranking.

Magdeburg, Germany, 20
th
December 2012
Author: Markus Selinger

Please contact the team at AV-TEST GmbH if you
have any questions.
[email protected]
Tel.: +49 (0)391 6075460