From what I've learned and read so far, the "respected" tests should be treated as a guide. No more, no less. Avcomparatives is another of the respected and serious organisations. One month Antivirus "a" gets top points, next it's maybe Antivirus "b". Because of the nature of malware, there will always be a day on which your "favourite" AV doesn't perform well. And then another day when it performs brilliantly.
Probably the only way to test objectively is by analysing real world experience. And because the test conditions are far from scientific and consistent, the results can nor should not be published.
But, you know, sometimes anecdotal reports, taken from a broad enough user base, will tell you what you need to know.
Most users are very happy with Avast. Why? Because in the vast majority of cases, it does the job well.
An AV doesn't (IMO) need to be always at or near the top of some testers' list (though Avast often is near the top) to be good.
