Brian,
It is worth noting that the these tests do not emulate real world end points and are not a good reading for true efficacy. There is a need for reform regarding how new AVs are put through the grinder and rated, which will hopefully be coming soon.
When it comes to Webroot Business Endoint Security, there is a test that shows some great results and might be of interest to you regarding your small enterprise solutions. It accurately exposes true efficacy, and is the "Removal of further malicious components and remediation of critical system modifications" test.
This looks at how well you are able to remove additional payloads of an infection and to restore a system to a state before infection.
Webroot scored 85% http://www.av-test.org/no_cache/en/tests/test-reports/?tx_avtestreports_pi1[report_no]=121434 vs.
Symantec's score of 54% http://www.av-test.org/no_cache/en/tests/test-reports/?tx_avtestreports_pi1[report_no]=121455
If anything, it never hurts to just give Webroot a try with the trial program, and then make the conclusion based off your experience: http://bit.ly/XOWCpI
Best of luck with your solution hunting.
To answer the question of "What tests are you referring to? And why aren't they a good measure? – D.W.", I am going to quote directly from the product developer as I cannot explain it any better.
Hi - This is Mike Malloy with Webroot. I am responsible for product development. Its easy to be concerned when you see test results like the recent AV Comparatives tests. We believe that these types of tests do not simulate a real user's experience with SecureAnywhere.
I feel like the parents whose child gets good grades in school but does poorly on tests. Tests like these were designed for the traditional, signature-based AV products and use samples provided by the vendors in the test. For example, in one recent test they put us on a PC with 985,000 pieces of malware which had been provided by some of the vendors. If your computer had nearly a million viruses on it, it would no longer be a computer! In the case of AV-C, I have asked my team to work more closely with them to understand their methodology and see if it could be made to more closely resemble what actual human users see. I respect AV-C and the individuals in it. I am concerned that these tests are not providing consumers the information they need to make an informed security decision. I also note that some other vendors have begun withdrawing from tests like these because they no longer represent (if they ever did) what actual users might see in terms of protection.
On the other hand, we're seeing stunning statistics in our customer satisfaction and overall efficacy. We survey a large group of customers every month. In our April survey of 958 customers, 96.6% said they were likely or highly likely to recommend WSA to their friends and family (while only 3 people said they were highly unlikely to.) Because of the Webroot cloud intelligence engine, we know exactly what we catch and exactly what we don't catch across our users and we're very proud about how well it's working so far. Seeing tests not accurately reflecting this is disheartening and a concern for us but as we learn more about how these tests work, we're starting to understand why our existing systems don't gel accurately with their methodology.
We are confident that you and the millions of other SecureAnywhere customers are getting the best protection in the security industry.
Mike Malloy, Webroot EVP Products and Strategy
*Source: www.community.webroot.com/t5/Webroot-SecureAnywhere-Complete/AV-Comparatives-April-results/td-p/4861#M480
