MalwareBytes is probably average in some respects of protection and better in others. Overall i would say it's worth using.
When AV products get tested every month and compared to see how well they do with detection of current malware, no one actually tests Malwarebytes as far as I know. Not sure if it's not considered an AV product like the others or what tbh.
As an example:
https://www.av-comparatives.org/
The other part is being part of malware forums and knowing what tricks malware coders are talking about to get around peculiarities of each AV, in a similar way to the security agencies do. Mash all the areas together and you get a better picture of the whole thing.
The threat model for the average user is exploit kit malware from spam and driveby exploits. Malwarebytes, Kaspersky and Eset would both likely know about and add signatures for this malware quicker than Microsoft. Not what the average use would expect.
Also keep in mind that Kaspersky and the others will happily and quickly add signatures of state sponsored malware whereas MS would happily take their time for the 5 eyes crew. Something maybe for journalists and those who slag off america from time to time. /looks shiftily at processes in htop