ZDNET58%

I tested Norton Antivirus for six weeks - and its biggest strength wasn't what I expected 53%

By Cesar Cadenas59%

7/9/2026, 11:30:41 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 27 faulty reasoning types, including Anecdotal, Negativity Bias, and Hasty Generalization, with Attempt to Sell a Product or Service as the most egregious example at 21.3% saturation with 311 hits. Analysis detected 2,088 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,459 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 51.9% and a BS Rank of 53% (10,303 of 21,886 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 52.90% of the article peer group.

'ZDNET Recommends': What exactly does it mean? 
ZDNET's recommendations are based on many hours of testing, research, and comparison shopping. 
We gather data from the best available sources, including vendor and retailer listings as well as other relevant and independent reviews sites. 
And we pore over customer reviews to find out what matters to real people who already own and use the products and services we’re assessing. 
When you click through from our site to a retailer and buy a product or service, we may earn affiliate commissions. 
This helps support our work, but does not affect what we cover or how, and it does not affect the price you pay. 
Neither ZDNET nor the author are compensated for these independent reviews. 
Indeed, we follow strict guidelines that ensure our editorial content is never influenced by advertisers. 
ZDNET's editorial team writes on behalf of you, our reader. 
Our goal is to deliver the most accurate information and the most knowledgeable advice possible in order to help you make smarter buying decisions on tech gear and a wide array of products and services. 
Our editors thoroughly review and fact-check every article to ensure that our content meets the highest standards. 
If we have made an error or published misleading information, we will correct or clarify the article. 
If you see inaccuracies in our content, please report the mistake via this form . 
I tested Norton Antivirus for six weeks - and its biggest strength wasn't what I expected 
Cesar Cadenas, Staff Writer 
July 9, 2026 at 4:30 a.m. 
PT 
Excellent real-world protection 
Key features behind paywalls 
AI assistant can be unreliable 
View now at Norton View now at Walmart 
Follow ZDNET: Add us as a preferred source on Google. 
Continuing my journey with today's antivirus programs , I spent the last month and a half using Norton Antivirus as my primary security suite to see whether the cybersecurity veteran is still a top-tier service. 
The answer to that question is a mixed yes and no. 
Also: The best antivirus software to protect your computer in 2026 
As an antivirus tool, Norton is excellent. 
It ranks among the best for malware protection and houses many powerful security tools. 
However, the service gets bogged down by intrusive elements that hampered my overall experience. 
Not to the point of uninstalling the program; it is still highly capable, but it did sour me on an otherwise great antivirus solution. 
Norton Antivirus offers powerful real-world protection and advanced scanning tools, though some of its upsells can feel excessive. 
Best personal data removal service deals of the week 
Incogni - Exclusive Deal: 55% Off Incogni Individual Annual Plan With Code "ZDNET" : 
Deals are selected by the CNET Group commerce team, and may be unrelated to this article. 
Norton Antivirus shares a similar layout to Malwarebytes, sporting a Home tab serving as a central hub that gives a quick overview of your PC's health. 
Additional categories are organized along the left-hand side in a clean, easy-to-navigate interface. 
As you can see in the image below, Norton shows that my system contained over 166GB of junk files, slowing down 30 apps. 
Clicking Continue brings up a detailed explanation of the issues detected. 
If you click Continue again on this new page, you are redirected to a window promoting Norton Utilities Ultimate, a separate subscription that will clean up said junk. 
If you close that page, another pop-up appears offering a 60-day free trial. 
Screenshot by Cesar Cadenas/ZDNET 
I wasn't a fan of this up-selling. 
I don't appreciate having to pay for another subscription to access Norton's full service. 
And it's not cheap either. 
After the trial, you'll have to pay $45.73 to continue using Ultimate Utilities for the remainder of your first year with Norton antivirus. 
After that, it's $70 a year for Ultimate Utilities on top of Norton's normal cost. 
Also: Want a private ChatGPT alternative? 
How Proton's Lumo 2.0 locks down your data, EU style 
For a premium security suite, I found it disappointing that several features are locked behind paywalls. 
It's easily my biggest complaint with the overall Norton experience. 
Norton's scanning features are among its strongest areas, offering an exceptionally comprehensive toolkit. 
You have the standard Quick Scan and Full Scan that other services provide. 
But there's also Smart Scan, which checks your PC for any privacy and performance issues, plus Targeted Scan for individual files and folders. 
The most interesting option is Startup Scan. 
This tool searches for deeply embedded malware during the Windows boot process that might otherwise evade traditional scans. 
I performed this scan, and after about 15 minutes, Norton uncovered a hidden Trojan I didn't know was there. 
Windows Defender didn't detect it, and neither did Malwarebytes when I tested it a few months ago. 
Below the Scan section on the Home tab is Scam Protection, a collection of security tools that aim to protect users from online scams and phishing attacks. 
It performed well during testing, consistently stopping viruses dead in their tracks and alerting me when I was about to visit a potentially malicious web page. 
This section also houses some of Norton's more niche features, such as Deepfake Protection, which analyzes video and audio played in an app to determine whether a sample has been altered or generated by AI. 
Also: I trusted Malwarebytes to secure my PC for a month - here's how it performed 
Similar to Malwarebytes, Norton Antivirus has its own AI assistant called Genie. 
It will answer all your burning cybersecurity questions and analyze suspicious emails, texts, and links. 
I found it to be quite reliable. 
I uploaded screenshots of multiple spam emails I received, and the assistant correctly flagged them all as scams, even providing an explanation of the scam type. 
Now, how effective is Norton as an antivirus? 
Very effective. 
On multiple occasions, it stopped malicious files that slipped past my browser's defenses and even my ISP's security filters. 
But I don't think anecdotal evidence tells the full story. 
Let's take a look at data collected by MRG Effitas , an industry-leading cybersecurity organization that tests the effectiveness of antivirus programs. 
Also: Do you still need third-party antivirus on your Windows PC? 
According to the organization's June 2026 Consumer Assessment report , Norton ranked among the top performers, blocking 98% of malware samples and producing no false positives. 
However, it's not the best. 
The service had a 0.33% malware miss rate, meaning a handful of threats slipped through its defenses. 
As a result, Norton earned a Level 2 certification from MRG Effitas. 
That's still a mark of excellence, although Malwarebytes edged it out by detecting every malware sample in its assessments. 
Even so, this small gap, in my opinion, will be negligible for most people. 
Based on my hands-on testing and independent lab results, Norton stands tall as a powerful antivirus, providing excellent protection year-round. 
ZDNET's buying advice 
Norton Antivirus is available across multiple personal plans, with Norton 360 Deluxe offering the best overall value. 
It is currently on sale for $50 for the first year, then increases to $125 annually after the introductory period. 
The Standard plan costs $40 for the first year, then $95, while the Select Plus plan costs $100 for the first year and $190 thereafter. 
I am having a hard time recommending Norton over Malwarebytes. 
I am not a fan of the paywalled features. 
The notices appear after performing a Smart Scan, and there's even a dedicated Store tab off to the side, serving as a constant reminder. 
Malwarebytes has its paywalls, but they don't feel as intrusive, and the features feel more supplementary than crucial. 
That said, Norton has its advantages. 
It catches threats that other antivirus programs miss, thanks to Startup Scan. 
Plus, the service provides a comprehensive security suite with unique features like its very own privacy-focused browser, password manager, cloud backup, and easy-to-use startup manager, just to name a few. 
If you're looking for an all-in-one security package, Norton is a great choice. 
I walked 3,000 steps with my Apple Watch, Google Pixel, and Oura Ring - this tracker was most accurate 
After using the MacBook Neo for weeks, switching to the Air has been refreshingly sweet 
I bought an earwax camera for my toolkit and use it for everything but my ears 
LG G6 vs. 
Samsung S95H: I compared the best OLED TVs of 2026 and made a tough choice 
Last chance to grab Prime savings on TVs, laptops, Apple and more 
Anthropic's Claude Cowork heads to the cloud as data shows 90% of sessions aren't for coding 
Sennheiser Momentum 5 vs. 
Bose QuietComfort Ultra 2: I compared the two and found a winner 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 3.3%Cesar Cadenas: 3.7%ZDNET: 2.9%Confirmation Bias3.3%This article: 1.7%Cesar Cadenas: 2.2%ZDNET: 1.7%Anchoring Bias1.7%This article: 10.1%Cesar Cadenas: 2.8%ZDNET: 3.1%Availability Heuristic10.1%This article: 4.2%Cesar Cadenas: 1.5%ZDNET: 1.0%Representativeness Heuristic4.2%This article: 0.0%Cesar Cadenas: 0.8%ZDNET: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 3.3%Cesar Cadenas: 2.9%ZDNET: 3.2%Overconfidence Bias3.3%This article: 3.3%Cesar Cadenas: 3.6%ZDNET: 4.2%Framing Effect3.3%This article: 5.3%Cesar Cadenas: 1.5%ZDNET: 1.4%Loss Aversion5.3%This article: 0.0%Cesar Cadenas: 0.2%ZDNET: 0.7%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 1.1%Cesar Cadenas: 0.4%ZDNET: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect1.1%This article: 2.3%Cesar Cadenas: 4.2%ZDNET: 5.2%Optimism Bias2.3%This article: 0.7%Cesar Cadenas: 0.6%ZDNET: 1.3%Pessimism Bias0.7%This article: 11.8%Cesar Cadenas: 2.6%ZDNET: 4.5%Negativity Bias11.8%This article: 2.3%Cesar Cadenas: 2.2%ZDNET: 1.6%Self-Serving Bias2.3%This article: 0.0%Cesar Cadenas: 0.2%ZDNET: 0.3%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Cesar Cadenas: 0.1%ZDNET: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Cesar Cadenas: 1.1%ZDNET: 0.5%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Cesar Cadenas: 0.1%ZDNET: 0.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 5.6%Cesar Cadenas: 8.0%ZDNET: 3.9%Halo Effect5.6%This article: 0.0%Cesar Cadenas: 0.1%ZDNET: 0.2%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Cesar Cadenas: 0.1%ZDNET: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 7.7%Cesar Cadenas: 2.4%ZDNET: 1.5%Recency Bias7.7%This article: 0.5%Cesar Cadenas: 0.5%ZDNET: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.5%This article: 0.0%Cesar Cadenas: 0.1%ZDNET: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Cesar Cadenas: 0.0%ZDNET: 0.0%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Cesar Cadenas: 0.1%ZDNET: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 10.8%Cesar Cadenas: 3.8%ZDNET: 4.7%Appeal to Authority10.8%This article: 1.2%Cesar Cadenas: 0.7%ZDNET: 1.5%False Dilemma1.2%This article: 0.0%Cesar Cadenas: 0.2%ZDNET: 0.6%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Cesar Cadenas: 0.3%ZDNET: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 11.0%Cesar Cadenas: 6.2%ZDNET: 6.5%Hasty Generalization11.0%This article: 3.0%Cesar Cadenas: 0.4%ZDNET: 0.5%Red Herring3.0%This article: 0.7%Cesar Cadenas: 1.2%ZDNET: 0.5%Bandwagon0.7%This article: 6.0%Cesar Cadenas: 2.1%ZDNET: 2.0%Appeal to Emotion6.0%This article: 0.0%Cesar Cadenas: 0.4%ZDNET: 0.7%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 2.1%Cesar Cadenas: 1.2%ZDNET: 1.5%Post Hoc (False Cause)2.1%This article: 0.0%Cesar Cadenas: 0.0%ZDNET: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Cesar Cadenas: 0.2%ZDNET: 0.2%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Cesar Cadenas: 0.0%ZDNET: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Cesar Cadenas: 0.2%ZDNET: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 14.8%Cesar Cadenas: 6.7%ZDNET: 4.9%Anecdotal14.8%This article: 0.0%Cesar Cadenas: 0.1%ZDNET: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 3.4%Cesar Cadenas: 1.3%ZDNET: 2.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation)3.4%This article: 0.0%Cesar Cadenas: 0.0%ZDNET: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 2.5%Cesar Cadenas: 0.4%ZDNET: 0.2%Middle Ground2.5%This article: 0.0%Cesar Cadenas: 0.2%ZDNET: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Cesar Cadenas: 0.1%ZDNET: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Cesar Cadenas: 0.0%ZDNET: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Cesar Cadenas: 0.4%ZDNET: 0.9%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Cesar Cadenas: 0.1%ZDNET: 0.5%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 0.0%Cesar Cadenas: 10.1%ZDNET: 6.8%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 3.2%Cesar Cadenas: 2.9%ZDNET: 3.9%Indoctrination3.2%This article: 0.0%Cesar Cadenas: 0.0%ZDNET: 0.0%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Cesar Cadenas: 0.0%ZDNET: 0.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 21.3%Cesar Cadenas: 14.4%ZDNET: 7.5%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…21.3%

1459 words analyzed.

Speakers

4speakers11%attributed speech1,300writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageZDNET • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageZDNET • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageZDNET • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 35 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageCesar Cadenas • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverageZDNET • 10 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 35 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 100.0% coverageCNET Group • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageCesar Cadenas • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 35 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageMRG Effitas • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageZDNET • 3 words • 0.0% coverageZDNET • 17 words • 100.0% coverageZDNET • 20 words • 100.0% coverageZDNET • 25 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

CNET Group

100%flagged-word coverage
16 attributed words10% of attributed speech84% writer coverage
0%10.0%20.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -18.4 ptsWriter: 18.4%CNET Group: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-3.5 ptsWriter: 3.5%CNET Group: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.