Interestingly enough, the entire section about lab tests scores and how superior Kaspersky (and other software) is to Windows Defender, could be summarized by these snapshots of independent test scores:
I'd like to mention that these labs are all independent, but they're all pay-to-play - meaning that they get paid to test, but not to assign a better score.
Labs which are AMTSO-certified are committed to testing by predetermined standards in order for the results to be comparable across labs and over time.
Now, while the methodology guidelines are the same for all of them, the methods themselves vary, and the malware against which AV software is tested differs between tests.
By using the tool above you get a more statistically significant results because it includes tests over time, and across multiple AMTSO-certified organizations.
I mean, I get the attitude of "common sense is best" - users who know what they're doing will most likely avoid infection if they're not extremely unlucky.
However, I still find it amazing that while people pay a lot more for insurance against less likely events, but the thought of paying few cents/day for an added layer of security for their machine (the same machine that in many cases stores a lot of personally and/or financially valuable information) riles them up.
When you're online you're constantly exposed to threats, and while it's easy enough to ignore spam email and unsolicited messages on Skype and FB, a momentary lapse of reduced attention could get you infected.
Kaspersky scores over the past 2 years: https://fatsecurity.com/tools/test-results-calculator?purpos...
Windows Defender scores over the past 2 years: https://fatsecurity.com/tools/test-results-calculator?purpos...