For many people, Windows Defender is enough. In AV-TEST’s August 2026 test, Microsoft Defender Antivirus earned the maximum score for protection and usability. It missed half a point in the performance category, giving it 17.5 out of a possible 18 overall. Several paid products scored a perfect 18, but so did free versions of Avast and AVG. The results suggest that paying for antivirus does not automatically buy better protection from malware. It may still be worthwhile if you want the extra tools bundled with a particular product. See AV-TEST’s August 2026 results.
How to read the scores
AV-TEST evaluated 15 security products for Windows home users during July and August 2026. It used the latest publicly available versions and their default settings, and tested them in realistic scenarios against real threats. Each product could earn up to six points in three areas: protection, performance and usability. That makes 18 the highest possible score. AV-TEST’s test overview explains the scoring system.
The categories cover different things. Protection measures how well a product blocks harmful software and threats arriving through websites and email. Performance looks at whether it slows down everyday tasks such as opening websites, starting programs, installing apps or copying files. Usability includes whether it wrongly warns about or blocks legitimate websites, programs or actions. So a strong overall score means more than simply detecting viruses.
Defender’s result is strong
In the August test, Defender earned 6 out of 6 for protection, 5.5 out of 6 for performance and 6 out of 6 for usability. AV-TEST reports that it blocked 100% of the newly encountered threats in its real-world test in both July and August, as well as 100% of the widespread malware in its reference set. It also recorded no false warnings or blockages in the listed usability checks. Read Microsoft Defender’s detailed report.
That is good news for people who already use the protection built into Windows. In this test, Defender matched the top score for protection. The half-point difference from a perfect total came from performance, not from a lower protection score.
It is also worth keeping the size of that difference in perspective. AV-TEST’s scoring gives six points to each category, so half a point is a small shortfall in one part of the test. The score does not mean that Defender is half a point “less safe” than a product with 18. Nor does it tell every person exactly how fast their own computer will feel. The tests compare products under set conditions; your experience will depend on your computer and what you do with it.
Paid products scored highly, but so did free ones
Several products in the August results received 18 out of 18, including Bitdefender Total Security, ESET Security Ultimate, F-Secure Total, McAfee Total Protection and Norton 360. But the perfect scores were not limited to paid packages: Avast Free Antivirus and AVG Antivirus Free also scored 18 out of 18. See the full August 2026 comparison.
The results don’t prove that all free products are equally good, or that every paid antivirus will outperform Defender. They cover a specific group of products, versions and test conditions at one point in time. But they do challenge the idea that a paid subscription is automatically necessary for good antivirus protection.
What the half-point difference can—and can’t—tell you
Defender’s lower performance score is the main measurable gap in these results. It tells you that, in AV-TEST’s evaluation, it did not earn the full six points for performance. It does not establish that every user will notice a slowdown, how noticeable it might be on a particular computer, or that one product will feel faster for every kind of task.
The detailed report breaks performance into everyday activities, including launching popular websites, downloading and opening programs, installing software, and copying files. Those checks are helpful because an antivirus product is running alongside the rest of the computer’s work. But the overall score is easier to compare than to translate into a personal prediction: it does not promise that a given product will make your laptop feel quicker.
If you are happy with your PC’s speed and Defender is already enabled, a half-point difference by itself may not be a compelling reason to buy another product. If you are comparing products because your computer feels sluggish, the test can help narrow down candidates, but it cannot diagnose the cause of your slowdown.
What paying might buy you
AV-TEST’s scores are about protection, performance and usability. They do not tell you whether a product’s price is worthwhile for your particular needs, or whether its bundle includes features you would use. Someone considering a paid product should therefore ask what they are buying beyond the antivirus score.
For example, a subscription may appeal if you want additional security or household tools in one package. Whether a bundle is useful depends on what it includes, how it works, what it costs and whether you would otherwise pay for those features separately. The AV-TEST table alone cannot answer those questions. It does show that the paid products tested performed well as security products, while also showing that Defender and some free alternatives scored close to or at the maximum.
A paid package is easier to justify when it solves a real problem for you: perhaps you value a particular feature, want one service across several devices, or prefer a product whose controls and alerts suit you better. Those are personal reasons to pay. They are different from claiming that Defender failed to protect users in this test—it did not.
The limits of a lab test
No antivirus test can guarantee that a product will stop every threat you might encounter. AV-TEST tested 15 products using default settings, current versions and realistic scenarios, but those results are still a snapshot. Threats change, products are updated, and your computer use may differ from the scenarios in a lab.
The scores also cannot replace everyday caution. Antivirus software is one part of staying safe; a good test result does not make every link, download or email attachment safe. It is sensible to keep Windows and your software up to date, and to be careful about unexpected messages and downloads, regardless of which product you choose.
Another useful detail is that AV-TEST awards its seal of approval to products scoring at least 10 points, and reserves its “Top Product” award for scores of 17.5 or higher. Defender’s 17.5 meets that higher threshold. That helps put the number in context: it is not a marginal pass, but a top-tier result under AV-TEST’s own scoring rules. AV-TEST’s scoring criteria are published with the results.
So, should you pay?
If you are a typical Windows user and Defender is working properly, the August 2026 results give you a reasonable basis to stick with it. It achieved full marks for protection and usability, and 17.5 out of 18 overall. You do not need to buy a third-party antivirus simply because you assume the built-in option is inadequate.
If you want to try a third-party product, the results suggest that you can compare free and paid options on their individual merits. Avast Free and AVG Free scored 18, as did several paid products. Look at the features, cost and terms as well as the AV-TEST score; a higher total by half a point does not automatically make a product the right choice for you.
For many households, the sensible answer is to keep Defender enabled and spend nothing on another antivirus unless a specific extra feature is worth the price. The test does not say all products are interchangeable, and it cannot predict your individual experience. But it does show that Defender performed very well—and that, in this round, paying was not the only route to a perfect antivirus score.