I've been looking at all these test results from different testing companies and was just wondering, are all these tests performed only on PC's or does it include the Mac computer also?

---

Conclusions - page 15/18

Webroot notes that testing occurred before it released its

script and anti-exploit protection.

---

I've been looking at all these test results from different testing companies and was just wondering, are all these tests performed only on PC's or does it include the Mac computer also?

In this test it only says Windows PCs. @bjm_ I understand that but the thing is when will Webroot Release the script and anti-exploit protection? It could be in 2020 or later as far as we know. They had the script shield in the Beta but it's gone from the UI at this time.

Consequently, it’s not a shock to see all products

handle the public threats very effectively.

Webroot Antivirus was a little weaker than the

competition here, though. Targeted attacks were

also handled well by most but caused some

significant problems for the products from Avast,

G-Data, K7, Webroot and Quick Heal. Webroot

notes that testing occurred before it released its

script and anti-exploit protection.

---

Not exactly reassuring. My wife swears by Microsoft Security ever since the latest Windows 10 Update. I'm no longer a doubter. Not really sure what to think at this point. SE Labs is a reputable testing site.

---

I've been looking at all these test results from different testing companies and was just wondering, are all these tests performed only on PC's or does it include the Mac computer also?In this test it only says Windows PCs. @bjm_ I understand that but the thing is when will Webroot Release the script and anti-exploit protection? It could be in 2020 or later as far as we know. They had the script shield in the Beta but it's gone from the UI at this time.

Consequently, it’s not a shock to see all products

handle the public threats very effectively.

Webroot Antivirus was a little weaker than the

competition here, though. Targeted attacks were

also handled well by most but caused some

significant problems for the products from Avast,

G-Data, K7, Webroot and Quick Heal. Webroot

notes that testing occurred before it released its

script and anti-exploit protection.

Well, we are told Webroot is different.

Yeah, 2019, 2020 or later as far as we know for Script Shield, Anti-Exploit, defense against process hollowing & ELAM solution that will work hand in hand with Microsoft ELAM driver to offer maximum protection.



Choosing an anti-virus is a matter of personal preference, your needs, your technical ability and experience, features offered, user friendliness, ease of updating (and upgrading to new program release), ease of installation/removal, availability of quality/prompt technical support from the vendor and price. Other factors to consider include detection rates and methods, scanning engine effectiveness, how often virus definitions are updated, the amount of resources the program utilizes, how it may affect system performance and what will work best for your system. A particular anti-virus that works well for one person may not work as well for another regardless of whether it is a free or paid for product.

There is no universal "one size fits all" solution that works for everyone and there is no one best anti-virus. (credit quietman7).



Security is all about layers and not depending on any one solution, technology or approach to protect yourself from cyber-criminals.

The most important layer is you...the first and last line of defense.

(credit quietman7)

---

I really don't understand why this thread was even started. We know that Webroot does not play well with current AV tests so it is not really so much of a surprise that it performed poorly in this test. Those of us who have had comparative experiences between Webroot and other leading AVs know that real life results are very different from the results we see in these tests. Indeed, you said pretty much the same yourself in a previous post, Daniel.



There are many anecdotal reports from sellers and MSPs serving hundreds or even thousands of endpoints, testifying to similar experiences to ours. What is more, some testers who take account of Webroot's somewhat unique approach, such as PCMag, reach completely different conclusions regarding its efficacy.



To my mind, drawing attention to yet another of these traditional tests in a Forum such as this just generates needless FUD.



And btw, merely from a cursory reading, I notice from page 17 of this Q4 report that SE Labs began their testing by using Webroot SecureAnywhere v9.0.19.43 which is a Q1 version ?!?

---

I think it is good if a agent from Webroot can view test.

---