Part of the problem in this segment is that there aren't clear definitions around some of these terms.
John started out essentially asking about motion vs. analytics, indicating they are two different things. I happen to agree that motion and analytics are two distinct categories of cctv featuresets (among many others).
Motion is easy, relatively speaking. It's practically free these days, lots of cameras have motion detection, many times with simplistic filtering like size or shape or location in the field of view. Motion, advanced motion, etc. does not try to present any real understanding of what it's looking at, it's basically just a filter with some set of parameters.
People frequently think of analytics as "super motion", which leads them to think of it as a "super detector", and we see this in demo videos sometimes. But, IMO, analytics is more about what you ignore, what you don't alarm on. Showing what you detect without showing what you ignore isn't much of a product testament. A true analytics system is trying to give some determination about what kind of object an apparant blob of motion might be, or even if it's an object at all vs. just a shadow or patch of grass.
I am not saying VideoIQ is the "best", but I am saying that the "best" motion detection will not come anywhere near true analytics in terms of coverage range/area and also accuracy of alarms over time. I'm also saying, much like John, that you might not need that level of sophistication at the typical residence. If your expectations are set correctly, a better motion-detection camera with a limited FOV or limited motion area might give you acceptable results.
If you keep the motion-detection area limited, you're going to eliminate a lot of false alarm sources by simply making them out. This means you get less coverage per camera, but given that a motion detection camera might be cheaper than an analytics option, and you probably only need a couple of channels, this works out in residential applications.
In commercial sites, that usually doesn't work as well. You want (or need) to get more coverage per camera for budget reasons. You're often monitoring areas near public spaces, so you have more potential sources of false alarms. In that case the analytics system can become more cost-effective because you have less cameras, more coverage, and better ability to deal with the problems that come with that scenario.