Retrospective / ProActive - Test May 2008 Copyright (c) by AV-Comparatives (www.av-comparatives.org) - Tested on Windows XP Professional SP2
	NOTE: Due some changes in the test, this time the results show only how the products scored at a specific (quite short) time and may due that not necessarly apply in general. Please read the report for details. Next time the test results will be again more meaningful, by including a larger quantity of samples and 2 different time-frames.
	Company				AVIRA			G DATA Security			Alwil Software			AVG Technologies			BitDefender			MicroWorld			F-Secure			Kaspersky Labs			McAfee			Microsoft			ESET			Norman ASA			Symantec			Sophos			AEC			VirusBlokAda
	Product				AntiVir PE Premium			AntiVirusKit (AVK)			Avast! Professional			AVG Anti-Malware			BitDefender AV			eScan Anti-Virus			F-Secure Anti-Virus			Kaspersky AV			McAfee VirusScan+			Microsoft OneCare			NOD32 Anti-Virus			Norman ISS AV+AS			Norton Anti-Virus			Sophos Anti-Virus			TrustPort AV WS			VBA32 Anti-Virus
	Program version				7.06.00.308			18.0.7227.533			4.7.1098			7.5.516			11.0.15			9.0.768.1			8.00.101			7.0.1.321a			12.0.176			2.0.2500.22			3.0.621.0			7.0			15.0.0.58			7.0.7			1.4.2.428			3.12.6.0
	Engine / signature version				7.06.00.62 / 7.00.02.90			18.2654 / 18.123			080203-0			269.19.19 / 1258			7.17325			N/A			7.30.13161			N/A			5200.2160 / 5222			1.3204 / 1.27.6270.0			2847			5.91.10			100204 / 78215			2.70.1 / 4.26E+132			2.6.0.1237			unknown
	Number of virus records				1.092.160			unknown			unknown			unknown			978.896			unknown			unknown			574.209			371.817			723.778			unknown			1.310.735			73.845			345.615			unknown			unknown
	Certification level reached*				ADVANCED+			ADVANCED			STANDARD			ADVANCED			STANDARD									STANDARD			ADVANCED			ADVANCED			ADVANCED+			STANDARD			STANDARD									STANDARD
	Number of false positives*				few			few			many			few			many			very few			very few			very few			none			few			few			many			very few			(very) many			(very) many			many
	On-demand scanning speed*				fast			slow			average			average			average			slow			slow			slow			average			average			average			average			fast			average			slow			slow
	ProActive detection of "NEW" samples**
	Windows viruses		190		171	90%		151	79%		149	78%		145	76%		166	87%		110	58%		110	58%		144	76%		148	78%		125	66%		45	24%		135	71%		12	6%		164	86%		173	91%		134	71%
	Script malware		287		95	33%		17	6%		14	5%		66	23%		33	11%		3	1%		9	3%		5	2%		23	8%		36	13%		9	3%		15	5%		63	22%		59	21%		80	28%		1	0%
	Worms		586		418	71%		159	27%		154	26%		241	41%		294	50%		50	9%		54	9%		108	18%		214	37%		140	24%		425	73%		148	25%		141	24%		422	72%		351	60%		93	16%
	Backdoors		4.055		3.193	79%		1.702	42%		1.682	41%		1.592	39%		2.022	50%		165	4%		165	4%		782	19%		1.676	41%		1.182	29%		2.713	67%		1.821	45%		938	23%		3.526	87%		2.935	72%		1.221	30%
	Trojans		6.258		4.340	69%		1.274	20%		1.267	20%		1.618	26%		2.556	41%		340	5%		340	5%		1.371	22%		1.574	25%		1.818	29%		3.309	53%		1.954	31%		891	14%		4.323	69%		3.736	60%		1.422	23%
	other malware		133		59	44%		13	10%		13	10%		40	30%		41	31%		0	0%		3	2%		3	2%		24	18%		41	31%		19	14%		6	5%		4	3%		44	33%		53	40%		9	7%
	TOTAL		11.509		8.276	72%		3.316	29%		3.279	28%		3.702	32%		5.112	44%		668	6%		681	6%		2.413	21%		3.659	32%		3.342	29%		6.520	57%		4.079	35%		2.049	18%		8.538	74%		7.328	64%		2.880	25%
	It is forbidden to provide those tables in full or in parts on other sites! Please just refer a link to www.av-comparatives.org
	Please read carefully the test reports and the other documents on our website to understand how to interpret the results.
	* = read the report for details ( ! )
	** = new unique malware appeared between the 5th and the ~12th February 2008 (~1 week); adware, spyware, non-working stuff, etc. are not included
	This retrospective test shows the proactive on-demand detection capability that the scanners had in February 2008 with highest on-demand detection settings over the 1-week test-set.
	To determine how good a scanner is in detecting malware on-demand in general with updated signatures, have a look on our February and August tests.
	Please rely on the reached certification levels (which take false alarms into account) and NOT on the percentages alone.