Matousec is really a HIPS tester, although some of the necessary features are built into what are called "Firewalls" today. I remember Comodo raised Hell with Matousec initially when D+ was run in "not the right mode" and they didn't score well. Now it has a Matousec mode, a dumb user mode, a smart user mode, and a few others I don't understand at all (in spite of having been a tester and moderator there for a year a while ago). I have independently tested things like OA with the HIPS turned off against leak tests, and it only scores mid-range. And I don't expect it to do better against threats that are more effectively countered elsewhere. Go read Wikipedia about Firewalls and HIPS. But congratulations to the applications that have packaged things that happen to do well in the Matousec tests. A good score is certainly a +.
Matousec is a test for resistance to malware that has already taken residence in your computer, which is a good thing to know, but is not always the way the applications package their stuff. And certainly less than the user wants-they want to never get to that point. And as pointed out previously, a lot of the features like Behavior Blockers and real time malware evaluation are just too hard to test there. A HIPS is fairly easy, because the BB/Malware Evaluator is the user, and since you know every popup is malware, you can pretty well ace the test if you at least have the right tools.
But Alwil still needs to deal with the propaganda machine, so it will be interesting to hear their evaluation and plans. BTW, did you notice that in spite of what Matousec might say, Avast! 5 still got 4.5 stars for its Firewall in the PC Magazine test of suites against important malware?