My Question is How are you going to improve the detection rate {69%} avg? Glenn Casey, It is awful!

AV Tests are in no way related to what our customers actually see. You wouldnt test an electric car using the same tests that you would put an traditonal gasoline powered car. Its the same with Webroot, we are so vastly different that the tests dont show this. 
 
 

First I would like to agree with @ on her comment about the comparisons. Here is a very well stated article on the differences between a conventional (Pure computer based) Antivirus and a Web Based (Cloud) Antivirus. It actually brings several great points on why they differ and why each has it's benefits and pitfalls.
http://anti-virus-software-review.toptenreviews.com/cloud-antivirus-vs.-pc-antivirus.html
 
With that said I also must add relying solely on several comparatives is not logical in that each has their own criteria which may or may not be applicable to what you are looking for. It is kinda like comparing Road & Track with Car & Driver for comparatives on a new Hyundai Accent. Both will give thorough reviews but with the criteria clearly different for the purpose they review.
 
I would also like to mention that Antivirus comparatives are very similar to computer benchmarks and sites that compare different hardware. Of course these will be different because again they use different criteria. And it also falls in to a personal experience index which can't be gauged with a benchmark.
 
Personally I think that Webroot does a great job (however this is again completely subjective opinion) much like some prefer Windows 7 over Windows 8. Nether are bad per se but it all depends on the person using it. I think the greatest selling feature of Webroot is the small package, never having to deal with definition updates and the pure speed of both bootup and of scanning.
 
To wrap up my comment, it is purely a personal choice on protection and the best way to prevent any problems is to be diligent on your use and to follow normal security measures. No Antivirus is 100% and none will ever be. As long as people want to cause hate and discontent they will create bugs and the antivirus world will be always playing catchup. But again in my opinion Webroot leads the way on the future of Malware protection.
 
 
 
 

why i trust Webroot antivirus because i visited a lot of malicious websites and found that it detect almost every malware it came through and phising sites...A normal users will not do that and it well protected by webroot......AV comparative test gives a lot, to choose which is better but i impressed with webroot its detection ........also its rollback feature.......
i have used avira,norton,f secure but i infected with cryptolocker and i lost everything like Pics, files....but i think if i used webroot then may be rollback feature work at that time.......
whtever it our choice try it...u feel the difference

I was thinking over the weekend, how many threads do we see like this? OP with one post, creates a thread and never comes back? I dont see the point of doing this? Anyways good replies by the two posters above. 

With deference to the vitriol of the OP, anyone doing preliminary research as to the efficacy of WR will most likely be unimpressed with their findings.
What other barometer can the normal potential customer rely on?
Most of the (very few) reviews by reputable agencies have given a rating of very low to abysmal.
I have viewed many Youtube video reviews (granted, some more amateurish than others), and virtually all deemed WR as useless, undesirable.
That said, it is understandable why some newbies / potential users would have some trepidation.
It would certainly be to Webroot’s advantage if they could negotiate with one of the testing agencies to test in an equitable manner.
The above not to be construed as a harsh critique, but honest opinion by a satisfied user with a 3 user AV license & a 5 user ISC license.

Regards