Interpreting the vast cybersecurity vendor landscape through the lens of industry analysts and testing authorities can immensely enhance your cyber-resilience.
Márk Szabó
James Shepperd
Ben Tudor
10 Dec 2025
•
,
7 min. read
Skip to the next paragraph if your eyes glaze over at the long, long titles of industry reports: the AV-Comparatives Endpoint Prevention and Response Comparative Report 2025, MITRE ATT&CK Evaluations Enterprise 2025, or the 2025 Gartner® Magic Quadrant™ for Endpoint Protection Platforms.
Despite their wordy nomenclature, every report mentioned above has a beneficial role in canvassing the colorful endpoint security landscape. Learned professionals capture its essence, so that security operators can work out which solutions should go into their protection stack.
It’s a bit like a figure drawing class: every artist will sketch the subject from a different viewpoint. You can tell it’s the same person in the picture, but every angle uncovers fresh perspectives. It’s up to the incident analyst, security manager, or CISO to make sense of them. How? And is there a way to connect the lines between them? Let’s help you figure it out.
Every picture begins with an outline, and every security story begins with an endpoint in mind. These endpoints, located at the heart of organizational infrastructure, are responsible for keeping companies viable – from day-to-day reporting to major transactions.
Producing value is one thing, but keeping it safe is another: hence the need for appropriate endpoint security measures. Most well-regarded independent analyst and lab test reports focus on endpoints, since they’re at the crossroads of every activity, including malign.
The challenge is that there are a lot of these reports. For endpoint platforms in particular, you have reports focused on:
There’s a test for anything, basically. If you’re feeling a bit lost, don’t worry. Navigating the industry analyst landscape is not for the faint-hearted, but it’s not as difficult as it looks. There is also a massive benefit in using the individual tests and reports together to triangulate your perspective and sense-check assumptions.
A major step when making a painting is blocking, accentuating light areas on a canvas, adding basic shapes and colors, followed by layering, giving more details and depth to the painting.
If you look at our list of various tests, you can make out a sequence going from more general reports (like the market quadrants) to some very specific ones (such as the Anti-Tampering test). Every report serves a different purpose and audience, but they all add up to a larger picture.
Navigating and finding what performance thresholds, features and operational approaches suit the needs of your environment and your security analysts is a question of personal interest and company requirements.
Interested in market trends? Go for one of the market quadrant reports. Are you a European CISO searching for local security solutions? Check out the ECSO Cyberhive Matrix, which accounts for three different categories: MDR, XDR, and SOC-specific tools like threat intelligence. Needing more transparency into the performance of a particular EDR solution against an advanced threat group? MITRE ATT&CK Evaluations Enterprise is the one for you then.
At the same time, it’s also good to mix and match here. It’s said that a person is the average of five people they spend the most time with. From that perspective, a cybersecurity solution is only as good as its score across five different tests. Academics also rely on peer reviews to verify their work, and this is as close as it gets.
The security painting is almost finished. What remains is to fill in a few spots, to touch up a few details.
For additional details, security managers should seek further confirmations of a vendor’s strength by exploring their partnerships (partner support or various joint efforts against APTs), their involvement in major initiatives and security events (like the Locked Shields cyber-wargames, or RSAC). These are all auxiliary efforts rounding out the “vibes” a security vendor gives.
Alternatively, if a vendor doesn’t care to get involved, then perhaps security isn’t really in their interests.
Independent testing is central to ESET’s commitment to transparency and product excellence. Independent evaluations explain how – and if – what we make works, and also gives us valuable insight into what we can adjust or improve to make it even better.
By participating in leading industry evaluations, including the MITRE Engenuity ATT&CK Evaluations – which assess detection capabilities against real-world adversary behaviors – we gain objective insight into our strengths, areas for improvement, and the effectiveness of new technologies. In a crowded cybersecurity market, this independent validation provides trusted, third-party proof that ESET delivers the protection and performance organizations expect.
But don’t take our word for it. See for yourself how we performed in this year’s MITRE ATT&CK Evaluations, whether the results in detection count/volume and protection align with your expectations, compare them with other tests and you might make out where ESET lies in the surreal landscape of cybersecurity.
Sign up for our newsletters
Business Security
Black Hat Europe 2025: Was that device designed to be on the internet at all?
Business Security
Black Hat Europe 2025: Was that device designed to be on the internet at all?
Business Security
Black Hat Europe 2025: Reputation matters – even in the ransomware economy
Business Security
Black Hat Europe 2025: Reputation matters – even in the ransomware economy
Business Security
Locks, SOCs and a cat in a box: What Schrödinger can teach us about cybersecurity
Business Security
Locks, SOCs and a cat in a box: What Schrödinger can teach us about cybersecurity
Business Security
The case for cybersecurity: Why successful businesses are built on protection
Business Security
Preventing business disruption and building cyber-resilience with MDR