Product Use case Rating
Bitdefender Antivirus for Mac Best Mac Antivirus 9
Sophos Home for Mac Best Free Mac Antivirus 8
Kaspersky Internet Security for Mac 8
Norton Security Deluxe (for Mac) 7
Avast! Free Mac Security 7
Avira Free Antivirus for Mac 6

Best Mac Antivirus Software

You need an antivirus program on your Mac. That statement may cause some Apple users to stop listening and walk away, but with the amount of Mac malware on the internet today, this is no longer up for debate.

In 2012, there was the Flashback Trojan that infected 600,000 Macs. In 2013, a targeted attack hit OS X developers at Microsoft, Facebook, Twitter and Apple itself. In 2015, the XcodeGhost attack poisoned hundreds of OS X and iOS apps. And in 2016, the first known piece of encrypting ransomware for Macs appeared.

After evaluating six free and paid Mac antivirus products, we've chose Bitdefender Antivirus for Mac ($40 per year) as our top pick. It offered lightning-fast scans and had a minimal impact on system performance, and was the only solution we reviewed that caught all malware.

Sophos Home for Mac is our favorite free option, as it provides very good malware protection and an easy-to-use interface while resulting in only a small performance hit.

How We Tested

To evaluate ease of use, interface and performance impact, we installed each AV program on the same late 2013 MacBook Pro with Retina Display running OS X El Capitan 10.11.4. It was powered by a 2.6-GHz Intel Core i7 processor and had 8GB of RAM and 23GB of data stored on a 512GB SSD.

We conducted our own tests in May and June 2016 based on how much each antivirus product affected our laptop's performance. To do this, we used our custom OpenOffice benchmark, which matches 20,000 names and addresses in a spreadsheet. We timed how long it took to run a quick scan and a full scan while the laptop crunched numbers in the background.

We assessed how easy each program was to use and the number of useful extra features it offered (including free add-on software). To gauge how effective each package was at stopping malware, we used the results of evaluations conducted in June 2016 by AV-TEST, a well-regarded independent product-testing lab in Germany. AV-TEST tested the Mac anti-malware engines of each brand to see how well each detected malware during active scans (which AV-TEST calls "on-demand" scanning).

Create a new thread in the Antivirus / Security / Privacy forum about this subject
16 comments
    Your comment
  • Paul NZ
    No you dont. I've never bothered with using a separate Av or firewall. I'm still here.

    They're all a waste of money. NOD32 is probably the only one worth getting. If I did use t
    0
  • JazzAzz
    Why isn't ClamAv for Macs mentioned???
    0
  • James_397
    Anonymous said:
    Whether you're running Windows, macOS or Android, you need antivirus software. The question is what you want -- and how much you should pay.

    Best Antivirus Software and Apps 2016 : Read more


    Yet another silly thread. If you have Windows installed, use Defender... period. Stop listening to all the third-party marketing hype. There is no need for anything other than what comes with the OS.
    0
  • Audcurr
    I think customer service should be taken into consideration as well. Bitdefender is the worst, I bought it and the activation key wouldn't work, it took for ever to get it straighten out and they are quite rude.
    0
  • jackj59
    Fwiw, dealing with an issue now, of virus and/or malware, and after running bitdefender and it clearing what it found, I ran malwarebytes and it found over 10 more instances of malware. So though one shouldn't run live more than one at a time, I recommend having malwarebytes and run it periodically, too.
    1
  • jackj59
    Correction: including PUP's - from something called AnonymizerGadget - malwarebytes now found hundreds of more that bitdefender, avast and TrendMicro all missed when using their free online scan. And they aren't simply "potentially" unwanted programs, that AnonymizerGadget is defintely mal/spy/virus ware.
    0
  • Alan_K
    I'm curious about why you didn't test Norton Internet Security. Not that I'm advocating it; indeed I look forward very much to spitting on Symantec's grave some day and only found this article while looking for alternatives. (That was after I found that Norton charged me three times for two subscriptions last year because they set up two automatic deductions on one of the subscription accounts. They then refused to refund the double payment because it was out of the "60 day guarantee period". Burn. In. Hell, Symantec.) However given that Norton would have a not-insignificant market share I would have thought that it would have been one of the ones to test. I would have been curious to see how it performed.
    1
  • Paul NZ
    Yup most of them are a waste of money.

    Doesnt matter what you get. And if you're stupid enough to use programs like Utorrent and get dodgy programs.

    Whats the point in having one anyway. Any AV program doesnt detect everything. And your system will end up infected anyway
    -1
  • Bill_123
    For people who seem to think anti virus programs are waste of time if they go on the internet and they depend on windows to protect them I would say there is a 99.9 percent chance they are already infected with some form of virus or malware. I have found that the better ones are VERY hard to breach and although it is still possible to get a virus the odds are slim to none. Without them your almost guaranteed you will pick something up in short order is just a fact in the modern age. The biggest issues I have is how much do they impact computer performance and how good is their detection. Some are like dropping a boat anchor dragging your computer down some almost unnoticeable. So instead of spreading viruses to all your friends and family get a good virus program and save yourself and everyone you know a lot of grief.
    0
  • espressonator
    Why isn't there a comparison chart? I've used Avast for years; it's free, and it's very good. Why did not Mr. Tom mention Avast as either better or worse than these paid products? My guess is that Mr. Tom is really acting as an advertiser. If he were "non-partisan", then I think he would provide a comparison chart or so to explain why it's worthwhile to pay for products like this instead.
    0
  • Bill_123
    Anonymous said:
    Why isn't there a comparison chart? I've used Avast for years; it's free, and it's very good. Why did not Mr. Tom mention Avast as either better or worse than these paid products? My guess is that Mr. Tom is really acting as an advertiser. If he were "non-partisan", then I think he would provide a comparison chart or so to explain why it's worthwhile to pay for products like this instead.


    You can find dozens if not more reviews on AV programs all of them will vary on who and why they think one is better than another. If you want to believe Avast free is the top choice based on your experience you can find a review to tell you that. Tomsguide is just that a guide based on things they feel are important. Pay programs come with many more features! If you feel you don't need or want these features then without a doubt they are not a good choice for you. What I want and need in a AV is very specific and might not be suitable for you. Same for most people there is no ONE SIZE fits all. It does not make them dishonest or biased just makes them have their own opinion no more or less. I come to this site for their opinion for a good reason I respect there opinions whether I agree with them or not.
    0
  • jraju1954
    Hi, I think that most of the av app for android is always running type taking phone battery resources. Is there a demand type scan antivirus prog for android in free version. Would someone say. i tried avast, it gives protection, but i do not know whether it has a demand type run of program. It does not have a user control install of its acessory software . Anybody knows
    0
  • tizziocaio
    Anonymous said:
    Fwiw, dealing with an issue now, of virus and/or malware, and after running bitdefender and it clearing what it found, I ran malwarebytes and it found over 10 more instances of malware. So though one shouldn't run live more than one at a time, I recommend having malwarebytes and run it periodically, too.


    bitdefender dont like it because forces to make an account and sign in before using it..like "meh rly?"
    Also does way to often background scans and updates like 10 times every day...
    0
  • boma23
    I was running a repair and IT solutions shop a few years back. We regularly installed a free solution on MACs that came in, ahnd a busy week might see 5 - 8 Macs in the shop at once. Sophos free (which is what we used at the time) probably found nasties on around 60% of Macs that came in without protection. Make of that what you will, if you are in the "AV for mac is pointless" camp.
    0
  • Thomas_223
    Sophos auto-update is the worst. Hangs your computer until it completes. No way to stop it or schedule it. Kills productivity until it hopefully finishes or fails and you have to try again.
    0
  • Nickynike
    AVG is a very good freebie. It finds viruses and scans emails. Yet, no mention. Then I scan with Malwarebytes, again free.
    0