VirusTotal (VT) provides aggregated threat intelligence on various entities including URLs, IP addresses, and binaries. It is widely used by researchers and practitioners to collect ground truth and evaluate the maliciousness of entities. In this work, we provide a comprehensive analysis of VT URL scanning reports containing the results of 95 scanners for 1.577 Billion URLs over two years. Individual VT scanners are known to be noisy in terms of their detection and attack type classification. To obtain high quality ground truth of URLs and actively take proper actions to mitigate different types of attacks, there are two challenges: (1) how to decide whether a given URL is malicious given noisy reports and (2) how to determine attack types (e.g., phishing or malware hosting) that the URL is involved in, given conflicting attack labels from different scanners. In this work, we provide a systematic comparative study on the behavior of VT scanners for different attack types of URLs. A common practice to decide the maliciousness is to use a cut-off threshold of scanners that report the URL as malicious. However, in this work, we show that using a fixed threshold is suboptimal, due to several reasons: (1) correlations between scanners; (2) lead/lag behavior; (3) the specialty of scanners; (4) the quality and reliability of scanners. A common practice to determine an attack type is to use majority voting. However, we show that majority voting could not accurately classify the attack type of a URL due to the bias from correlated scanners. Instead, we propose a machine learning-based approach to assign an attack type to URLs given the VT reports.