AncestryDNA Revises Ethnicity Estimates

AncestryDNA today (12 September 2018) released updated ethnicity estimates for all customers. Everyone in the AncestryDNA database will see some change in their estimate.

This update represents one of the most significant refinements of AncestryDNA’s ethnicity estimates. Both the reference populations and the ethnicity algorithm underwent significant development.

The size and makeup of the reference populations grew substantially, from ~3,000 reference samples to ~16,000 reference samples (many provided by test takers that consented to participating in AncestryDNA research). The update adds 17 new regions to the ethnicity analysis (from 363 to 380). Many more are needed in areas such as Asia and Africa, of course, but this is a great addition. As well, many regions were redefined or their names were changed to more accurately reflect the region.

In addition to changes in the reference populations, the method by which AncestryDNA calculates ethnicity changed significantly. The algorithm now uses stretches of DNA to perform the calculation instead of individual SNPs.

Here is my own update (click to enlarge), showing the previous estimate (left) and the current estimate (right):

As you can see, my estimate changed significantly at first glance, although upon review the changes are very minor. For example, the region called “England, Wales & Northwestern Europe” with 87% really just combines “Great Britain” (55%) and Europe West (26%). My Native American ancestry remains 3%, and the name changed slightly. My African ancestry solidified at 1%.

And, most importantly, I lost a lot of “noise.” Ethnicity estimates are notoriously noisy, and some algorithms are better than others at smoothing out that noise. This new algorithm appears to be much better at eliminating the noise. Many users are going to be disappointed to lose this noise. However, in all my presentations about ethnicity I emphasize the importance of questioning these small percentages and using multiple calculators/tests to investigate them.

Based on my knowledge of my family history (an incredibly imperfect way to evaluate ethnicity!), the changes I see in my updated ethnicity estimate all make sense.

Here is the evolution of my ethnicity estimate over the past 6 years (click to enlarge), showing the incredible changes that have occurred:

Your ethnicity estimate will continue to change over time, and that’s a good thing. The worst thing that could happen is that there are no more changes. I’ve had many people tell me over the years that these ethnicity estimates will always be terrible and that we’re stuck with what we have. I’m always amazed that genealogists (who in their own lifetimes have seen genealogy go through so many changes!) believe that the current state of DNA and ethnicity estimates is the final word or what we’ll have 5, 10, or 20 years from now. These ethnicity estimates will continue to improve, and it is nearly impossible to predict where the field will go in the future.

Here is another example of an update:

In this example, several regions were lost, several regions were gained, and several regions were combined together and/or their names were changed.

71 Responses

  1. Shirley McDougall 12 September 2018 / 4:41 pm

    Enjoyed reading your account of updates re DNA results. Thank you.

  2. JB 12 September 2018 / 9:04 pm

    In my case, the ethnicity estimate change looked wrong. I was previously identified as 18% Italian (and I have an Italian grandfather whose family dates to 1450 in central Tuscany). In the revision, that disappeared, and was replaced with German and French ancestry. Feels wrong to me.

    • Laura 19 September 2018 / 1:40 pm

      I had a similar result and I’m seeing that happen for many people. My initial estimate of 13% Italian seemed spot-on and it disappeared completely.

    • Andrea 29 September 2018 / 2:24 am

      My father is 100% northern Tuscan and my results (since the new update) went from 0% to 46% French and my Italian went from 36% to 34% Italian. According to Ancestry.com, I’m almost half French (even though I don’t know of any French ancestry in my family) and I’m only 34% Italian even though my father is full Italian (with a dozen family trees going back several centuries in northern Tuscany). My mother is half Spanish and English and my Spanish went from 20% to 10% and my 20% English became 10% Ireland and Scotland.

    • Kelly 20 October 2018 / 5:11 pm

      I am even more confused now that my mother has done the dna Test. In my old estimate I had small percentages of middle eastern and Turkish . With the new update Turkish and middle eastern have disappeared. My mother just did the test and she came back with 15% Turkish and 6% middle eastern which is more in line with my old estimate. How is it possible that the Turkish and middle eastern have disappeared from my new results when they clearly had it right the first time since my mother’s results clearly show Turkish and middle eastern?

    • anonymous 20 October 2018 / 10:13 pm

      My “noise” was Iberian and Asian DNA from a Filipina great-grandmother who now doesn’t show up on my results at all. It was only ~10% total, but I’m still mad even though 23andMe shows it (and more accurately than Ancestry ever did).

      My German, Dutch and French ancestry was swallowed whole by the “England and Whatever” category, but that’s understandable. I’m just bitter the name isn’t simply “Northwestern Europe.”

    • Keith 11 November 2018 / 1:25 pm

      It is wrong. My Y chromosome test done by a Swedish company showed a strong Iberian peninsula connection to Berbers. Ancestry.com update zeroed out my original 13% finding through them.

  3. ROBERT J KORBACH 13 September 2018 / 9:47 am

    I’m now listed as 63% British Isles but have records back into the 1700’s of coming from 5 distinct regions (e.g., Eifel, Westerwald) in Germany. There is still a fundamental flaw in this methodology of estimating ethnicity.

    • JT 23 October 2018 / 2:26 am

      I went from 3% British to 67% !!!! 11% Afghanistan replaced by 11% Asian (China, Lao) OMG this is disappointing. How can I be almost no British ancestry to 3/4’s in their update!

  4. Robert Kelly Dazet 13 September 2018 / 11:32 am

    Why, oh why is Ancestry DNA messing with the Ethnicity Estimate, instead of giving us useful tools, like a chromosome Browser, Triangulation, shared matches between 5th-8th cousins and 5th-8th cousins! (MyHeritage DNA has much better tools)!
    I really don’t care about an “Estimate”! If genealogy tells me that I’m Ulster Irish, Norwegian, German and French (Pyrenees) how can I have such a large percentage of England/Northwestern Europe? This is a total waste of resources on Ancestry’s part. Instead they should be focusing on making DNA work better as a genealogical tool to help break down brick walls.
    We are talking at-DNA here not Y-DNA or mt-DNA meaning it becomes less accurate after 6 or so generations. In that time frame, I have no ancestors from England. Of course the English had their “Plantation of Ireland Era”, but that is not a likely source of a large percentage of English DNA, nor is the Norman evasion of England or the Germanic Saxons before that.
    Please Ancestry, fix the poor messaging system and give us better DNA tools, like those that MyHeritage DNA has! What a MESS!

    • Robert Kelly Dazet 13 September 2018 / 11:44 am

      A thought: could this large percentage of English, Wales, Northwestern Europe (which is in itself pretty vague) be skewed by the large number of Irish that flooded Scotland and England during the potato famine? Or Germans during the Palatine migration? Just more reasons why ethnicity estimates are a waste of resources as far as genetic genealogy goes.

      Also I should have thanked you, Blaine, for pointing our this big change by Ancestry to us! Thank you!

    • anonymous 20 October 2018 / 10:15 pm

      If you look at the map, much of France, Germany and Ireland is included in the Northwestern Europe category.

      Why they decided to confuse anyone by calling England, Wales and Northwestern Europe instead of just Northwestern Europe I can’t even begin to comprehend.

    • Suzanne 27 October 2018 / 6:54 pm

      Robert, I couldn’t agree more! They are not in the business of catering to serious genealogists.

  5. Robert Ceccon 13 September 2018 / 1:44 pm

    Here’s what perplexes me:

    I have 48% Italian DNA. (This makes sense because both of my father’s parents are from Italy.)

    However, neither of my two children have any Italian DNA.

    Can you explain how this is possible?

    Thanks.

    • JVerdant 15 September 2018 / 7:55 pm

      It’s entirely possible that, since each of your children inherit a random 50% of your DNA, they both randomly received it from the 52% of your non-Italian DNA. It’s not the most likely possibility, but a coin can land on heads five times in a row too.

    • JVerdant 15 September 2018 / 8:01 pm

      Forgot to add: This also explains why a lot of people are perplexed they don’t see country x from their genealogy research in their results. If each of your kids inherited a negligible amount of your Italian DNA, none of their children could possibly show it either, despite the fact they can prove they descend from Italians on paper. DNA can inform ancestry but autosomal DNA can’t possibly show traces of all your ancestors, even a few generations back, because it’s being chopped up, reshuffled, and half discarded every generation.

    • Janet Freeman 18 September 2018 / 12:57 pm

      I agree that it seems like they would have some Italian DNA. My new DNA results were 100% Eastern European & Russian. My mom is 96% and my dad is 91%. My daughter is 27% and my son is 33%.

    • Peter 25 September 2018 / 5:19 pm

      Me too. My Italian was 43% Italy, now it’s 12% (and all of a sudden France 30%, previously not even listed). Very strange, since I know for sure my paternal grandparents were born in Italy. Maybe because they are from northern Italy, there is some French DNA? This seems like an unusually high shift.

  6. James C Yates 13 September 2018 / 5:20 pm

    The new ethnicity estimate makes much more sense to me that the old one.

    • John 21 September 2018 / 8:49 am

      Ancestry.com’s updated DNA estimates are not accurate. At all. For one relative of mine that has a completely European heritage from what are now Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, Switzerland, Austria, and Scandinavian countries with an accurate paper trail and other DNA tests from different companies just confirm this while Ancestry claims this relative is mostly British which is not accurate. They separate France and Germanic Europe (includes UK, Scandinavia, various Central European countries, and the Netherlands) when genetically they are pretty much all the same as Germanic people settled in these modern day regions and countries in Europe, and France and Scandinavian countries, and the UK are part of Germanic Europe. European people are not that genetically different, and the various regions and cultures invaded each other for millennia. Also, in physical appearance people who are European do not really have major identifying physical features that are really noticeable to someone who is not European.

      You also have people who are European who get inaccurate results from Ancestry.com that they have low amounts of Sub Saharan African DNA which is just background noise.

    • anonymous 20 October 2018 / 10:17 pm

      Even a stopped clock is right twice a day. (Or once, in Europe. Whatever. It’s a metaphor.)

  7. chris 15 September 2018 / 4:34 am

    i went from majority scandinavian to majority england, wales & northwestern europe.how is this possible?shouldn’t it have just got more specific on the scandinavian?

    • JVerdant 15 September 2018 / 8:05 pm

      Some parts of Scandinavia might have DNA too similar to Northern Europe to allow any reliable distinction. The new update seems to be erring on the side of caution (elimination of low confidence hits etc.) so in your case the Scandinavian DNA might be a portion hard to tell apart from Netherlands etc.

    • PK 21 September 2018 / 4:50 pm

      Same here; Went from 30% Scandinavian to 0% Scandinavian. The “interesting” low confidence areas all disappeared. In addition, my closest relatives all have Native American ancestry which increased with the update, while I am the lone relative with 0% Native American ancestry. Huh?????

  8. Mike 17 September 2018 / 4:43 am

    It’s interesting that I was just talking to two different friends (both non-related to each other) with majority Irish Ancestry and both had 1% Ivory Coast/ Ghana added to their estimate in this latest update when they had no sub-Saharan African in their old estimate. I’m thinking the algorithm still needs some tweaking.

    • Khalid 21 September 2018 / 7:00 pm

      If they are Caucasian American having a smidge of African dna from a country with a major slave port is not that unbelievable. Mine changed from 18% British to 20% Irish.
      Turns out I’m over a quarter European looking at living family members one can have the wrong idea imagine members from 100s of years back. The more test samples that we as Americans allow to be tested can be better studied with those over seas samples that are not as mixed ethnicity wise. Noise has been reduced with this new update. I lost Asian, Native American and several other ethnicities, they may or may not come back as time progresses.

  9. David 17 September 2018 / 5:02 pm

    My original DNA profile listed me as 72% Western European and only 2 % English. In the new Profile, I am in the new grouping; England, Wales & Northwestern Europe at 80 %. Originally my English Heritage was 2%. My Mother, sister, brother, and cousin showed predominately English Heritage. Myself, my Great Aunt and nephew were predominately Western European. I am no expert with genealogy and DNA technology but when I was teaching school, this would be like giving a student an A on Friday and then amending my criteria by Monday and changing their grade to a C. It would have been nice to know this was coming and that my original DNA in 2012 could change so drastically. To me, this was poorly handled and makes me question whether I should seek out another genealogy site to continue my research. Many, many questions ???????????

    • Sharon 26 September 2018 / 3:36 pm

      I went from a large mix to 100% French. I have English ancestors and Native American. I have no idea who is at the controls but I have “0” faith. Sticking with my 23&Me results. At least they found and kept my native line.

  10. Walt 18 September 2018 / 1:03 pm

    My new estimate makes absolutely no sense. They are now listing me as 81% Irish/Scottish/Welch/English and while that ethnicity rings true on my mother’s side, my father’s family came from Cape Verde and lived there for many generations with lines traced only back to Portugal and Italy. And both my children ended up with several ethnicities not present in either my profile or that of my wife.

  11. John 20 September 2018 / 11:59 pm

    Ancestry.com’s updated DNA estimates are not accurate. At all. For one relative of mine that has a completely European heritage from what are now Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, Switzerland, Austria, and Scandinavian countries with an accurate paper trail and other DNA tests from different companies just confirm this while Ancestry claims this relative is mostly British which is not accurate. They separate France and Germanic Europe (includes UK, Scandinavia, various Central European countries, and the Netherlands) when genetically they are pretty much all the same as Germanic people settled in these modern day regions and countries in Europe, and France and Scandinavian countries, and the UK are part of Germanic Europe. European people are not that genetically different, and the various regions and cultures invaded each other for millennia. Also, in physical appearance people who are European do not really have major identifying physical features that are really noticeable to someone who is not European.

    You also have people who are European who get inaccurate results from Ancestry.com that they have low amounts of Sub Saharan African DNA which is just background noise.

  12. Mike H. 21 September 2018 / 11:53 am

    The new “revised” results are a crock. Actually, the whole DNA testing process is…let me explain. My parents have spent countless hours doing proper genealogical research, going state to state, courthouse to courthouse, grave site to grave site. They have copies of birth certs, death certs, marriage certs and immigration records.

    Out of curiosity, my wife and I sent in our spit to Ancestry DNA. Her results were perplexing, showing 17% Scandinavian, 1/3 Iberian Peninsula, when she never knew that was in her family history. For me, everything I had seen seemed very accurate…56% German, 35% English/Scottish.

    After the revision, my wife’s results now seem accurate with French/British/Irish and no Scandinavian. But mine have taken a turn. 22% German, 52% Brit/Scot, 12% Norway, 6% French. Um…no! There is ZERO Norwegian and French in my family. Where did this come from?

    • Schröder 8 October 2018 / 1:28 pm

      We are literally talking about thousands of years of people having sex… Records from the close past on immigration are not a substitute for DNA results.

      • anonymous 20 October 2018 / 10:35 pm

        Ancestry isn’t using people from thousands of years ago for their reference populations, though.

  13. Canadian K 21 September 2018 / 2:46 pm

    I just received my results after the change and I am frustrated “England, Wales & Northwestern Europe” are now all grouped together. They claim to go into detail for 13 more regions below this but I have “no connections”.

    Similarly “Ireland and Scotland” can be broken into 24 regions, and I belong to the big group, but to none of the sub groups.

    How can I be X% “England, Wales & Northwestern Europe” but then there is no way to know if that is w% Welsh, x% English, y% French or z% German?

    My ancestors could basically be 100% from the UK. I was not expecting that as a mixed Canadian. From the videos I have watched even many UK citizens have Iberian or Scandinavian.

    Looking at the New results had hitting the “see other regions tested” button are ANY of you getting data from the subgroups?

    I have a feeling this detail is broken or in progress.

    • Alec van Helsdingen 21 September 2018 / 8:01 pm

      The “subregions” are genetic communities. There has to be quite a high standard of evidence to be assigned to one of those, therefore many customers like you and I don’t have any of them.

  14. John Berger 25 September 2018 / 11:22 am

    Waste of my money. Went from 30% Eastern Europe to 75% Germanic.
    But….. we all sent our DNA to a main data bank

  15. Preston 26 September 2018 / 10:50 am

    I understand the changes can be frustrating but it seems like a lot of people here would be better off considering that there might be misattributed paternity in their family trees rather than blaming Ancestry.

    • Sharon 27 September 2018 / 2:57 pm

      I completely agree. I’ve found quite a few cases of infidelity and adoption within my tree. This changes everything when looking at ethnicity. My ethnicity looks more accurate since Ancestry’s latest update. I now have Scandinavian and Norwegian when before I had none, and my background noise of Middle Eastern and Ashkenazi Jewish have disappeared.

      • Schröder 8 October 2018 / 1:56 pm

        Ditto on that one! Tons of adoption and infidelity in my tree. The “noise” of Middleastern in my results has completely disappeared and now reflects my researched parish records from the 1600s in Bergen, Norway – even they were having children out of wedlock, but they were all Norwegian.

        I think that this DNA testing has created a massive identity crisis for those who may have believed their family stories. People create a narrative for who they think they are, or want to be, and that bubble explodes when the DNA tests come back.

    • Alan Guttmann 1 October 2018 / 12:11 am

      I attribute it to Autosomal ancestry testing being a pseudoscience.
      The only thing it can accurately do is match close relatives.
      Give 5 identical samples to separate companies and prepare for totally different results, that in many cases wildly differ.
      In particular, highly admixed ethnic groups are getting loopy and inconsistent results.

    • anonymous 20 October 2018 / 10:37 pm

      You cannot determine misattributed paternity from an ethnicity estimate. You can only use matches for that.

      And the changes are frustrating for a lot of people because their previous results matched their genealogical research and the new ones are wildly different.

  16. Ken James 29 September 2018 / 3:21 pm

    My DNA changed significantly and now makes no sense. If this upgraded DNA had been provided to me when I was tested I would never have made the discoveries I did. I went from 30% Great Britain to 3% and all of a sudden have 19% German. I have not found one German surname in the past 250-300 years in any of my generations. They are from Great Britain, Sweden and Poland. I have written Ancestry asking for an explanation. I can’t do research based on faulty data. Are both estimates accurate, and are they now showing us the entire forest rather than the tree we’re looking for? I am not happy with this at all.

  17. Ken James 29 September 2018 / 3:28 pm

    Please write Ancestry at to voice your concerns:

    Ancestry.com, Inc
    1300 W. Traverse Parkway
    Lehi, Utah 84043

    If both Previous Results and the Update are accurate but presented in different ways that needs to be stated. If new users get results based on the Upgrade format I think there is a good chance they will receive erroneous results. I was going to have my cousin test but not now.

    • Alan Guttmann 1 October 2018 / 12:04 am

      Why bother, they already scammed us out of our money.
      I’m just going to give bad reviews and warn people not to use them….

  18. Alan Guttmann 1 October 2018 / 12:02 am

    The new update is a total scam.
    I just received 10% more “European Jewish” apparently before the update AncestryDNA couldn’t tell “Western Europe” and “European Jewish” apart…
    This does however give some insight into the strong Western European influence that at least some Ashkenazi Jews apparently possess….

    I allso went from 0% to 14% Ireland and Scotland…
    Great, I will breakout the kilt, until the next “update” wipes that out and tells me I’m French…

    Autosomal DNA testing for ancestry is a total fraud and I’m sure my next “update” will be totally different.
    I have tested with 3 different companies and ALL the results WILDLY differ.
    Save your money folks….

  19. Joshua Hughes 1 October 2018 / 2:47 am

    They gave me 1% Jewish but neither of parents were given any Jewish. I’m not adopted as ancestry made clear.

  20. Roger 1 October 2018 / 8:48 pm

    When my dna was initially analyzed, it indicated 3% Iberian/North Africa heritage. I was contacted approximately a week ago saying that methods were changed. My 3% Iberian/North Africa heritage was removed. About this same time a news article appeared describing a similar heritage dna result was not accepted by federal government. Individual was denied federal assistance for minority business owners. Case has gone to court.
    Was my change in heritage due to new techniques or to avoid potential court case?

    • Schröder 8 October 2018 / 1:48 pm

      I personally have real problems with individuals claiming “minority status” in order to obtain special programs that are specifically designated for minority groups. If a Caucasian has 1% sub-Saharan African in their DNA, this does not entitle them to reap benefits – otherwise, there wouldn’t be these benefit programs in place because we are all a portion of African, if traced back far enough. With DNA testing in place, there may need to be actual percentages in lace in order to obtain these benefits based on “race”. Yes, I know that we are all of the “human race”, but that’s just not how this world works, unfortunately. If someone goes by “family stories”, it makes things even worse – we then have people taking advantage of minority programs who are definitely not in any minority group (i.e. the Native American claims by white southerners). Dicey waters.

      • A 21 October 2018 / 4:11 am

        I get what you’re saying and agree, but European descended people aren’t Caucasian anymore. Europeans are now genetically distant from people living in the modern Caucasus region. Caucasians are significantly more Asian shifted than Europeans. I could go on and on about the science of this, but what I’m getting at is, we can call a spade a spade. And that’s that privileged white people have no business appropriating affirmative action. No need to call ourselves something we haven’t been for thousands of years lol.

  21. Joy 2 October 2018 / 1:20 pm

    My updates appear much better. All the ancestors I find are German. Now I am almost totally Germanic Europe. Older version had me all over Europe and some Turkey.

  22. M. Willoughby 2 October 2018 / 2:35 pm

    Terribly confused. My husband says that his grandmother was full blooded Cherokee Indian although her maiden name was Luttrell which is French. Our son did the Ancestry DNA testing and shows he is 28% Native American… North, Central, South in the Northeastern Mexico & S. Texas areas. That information is accurate as my grandfather is from Mexico. My question is why my husband’s grandmother was not under Native American as he truly believes and was told his grandmother was Cherokee Indian who lived in Tennessee.

    • Schröder 8 October 2018 / 1:35 pm

      Beliefs are much different than facts – old family stories cannot be relied upon. My dad said he was “blueblood German”, which is a crock because his mother was 100% Norwegian and his father was German/Irish. I think that people, in general, want to envision their roots in some exotic way – and then the truth hits when the DNA comes back.

      • Fuck Off 15 October 2018 / 9:18 am

        I notice that you feel your results are more accurate and so you are defending the results lol. I wonder how you would feel if it changed and all of YOUR research turned to shit over night.

    • T 17 October 2018 / 12:17 am

      80% Mexicans have Native DNA. There’s not enough samples from tribes, and some tribes are too intermixed with other groups. Export the data to myheritage, ftdna, gedmatch and dna.land for their badmixture results.

  23. MikeS 6 October 2018 / 12:31 am

    My original ancestry estimate made sense (mostly British as most of my roots are from old New England) except for the higher than expected Scandinavian that I figured was part of the influxes of Danish etc. into England about 1000 years ago. However, my Italian/Greek that was originally 21 percent now has dropped to 2 percent and my grandfather came from Greece, looked Greek and my cousin from Greece is obviously Greek. My Y-haplogroup is E-V13 which is definitely Balkin which includes Greek. I can accept my British going down a bit and Western Europe going up as Britain was definitely a melting pot and it might be hard to differentiate that mixing. However, my Greek ancestry of approximately 25 percent should still be there. I think where Ancestry originally overestimated the Scandinavian percentage in British ancestry, now the Italian/Greek is being underestimated. Ancestry should focus more DNA sampling in those areas (Italy/Greece) as I have seen many recent articles online complaining about that same issue.

  24. Carol St Pierre 6 October 2018 / 9:00 am

    While my DNA results as well as my husband’s and mother-in-law’s have drastically changed to what makes much more sense, the scope of those changes worries me. Where my husband was 47% British before, which was a big surprise and hard to believe, he is now 98% French and not British at all, which makes more sense. His mother was 39% British and now is 100% French. Mine showed 27% Great Britain, 14% Ireland/Scotland/Wales but now I am 98% French. We’ve always believed we were French and our trees reinforce that. Although I understand at different points in history people have migrated and regions have changed hands frequently, such as when Eleonor of Aquitaine’s lands in a large area of France became part of the English empire with her marriage to king Henry of England (and which I originally thought was the only explanation for so much Great Britain in our DNA) I find it disturbing that the numbers have changed so drastically. How can we trust any ethnicity estimates, even when they now seem correct? Will they again change drastically in the future to something else we can’t believe?

  25. Molly 6 October 2018 / 11:22 am

    I cam here also because of my Ancestry DNA results change that made little sense-. My mother’s side of our Turkish heritage is from Georgia and my Dad is from Aegean coast north. Original said 60% caucasian which makes sense from mom’s side. Then I was 27% Italian southern european and the rest were minor percentages from many areas. Dad’s side from Western coast of Turkey made sense with south European. NOW my result dropped caucasian to 40% south Europe dropped to 5% and a whopping 25% is now showing Iran/Persian–thats new. Very odd. Does not make sense on how South Europe turned into Persian. When I first saw the note my results for revised I thought they would break it down into more specific areas in the Caucasus region or s. Europe. Instead it switched continents.

  26. Kitty Rodriguez 8 October 2018 / 2:58 pm

    The new northwestern Europe is blurred. What happened to the southern European percentages ? Any casual observer would say that my dad and grandmother , uncles, are southern European. How could Scottish and British, for example, have such dark eyes, olive complexions, with such thick wavy hair ? Don’t believe the ” new” results. The ” old” one should be included too. Otherwise it would have been a lie to start with.

  27. Carol Rodriguez 8 October 2018 / 3:00 pm

    The new northwestern Europe is blurred. What happened to the southern European percentages ? Any casual observer would say that my dad and grandmother , uncles, are southern European. How could Scottish and British, for example, have such dark eyes, olive complexions, with such thick wavy hair ? Don’t believe the ” new” results. The ” old” one, which included southern Europe, should be included too. Otherwise it would have been a lie to start with.

    • Danielle Smart 19 October 2018 / 7:47 pm

      I have the same problem, now 48% Scottish and 52% English (up 46%) Iberian removed but why do I have olive skin, dark curly hair and dark brown eyes?

  28. Reece 8 October 2018 / 9:40 pm

    The pool became tainted over the last several years. Millions of new migrants flooding into Europe are changing the pools. As far as the Scandinavia results go, they spread their genetics so much into all the areas surrounding Scandinavia that im sure an accurate result cant be reached. ALSO my Iberian Pen totally disappeared. Which is BS. My grandmas family literally came from Spain after living there for countless generations. I kinda feel like Ancestry dropped the ball big time. Whats with all these people all the sudden becoming 1% sub Saharan African? Literally it says like everyone.

    • anonymous 20 October 2018 / 10:43 pm

      Ancestry’s reference populations use people with verifiable ancestry from a specific region for a few hundred years. Modern migration is not affecting the results at all, or “tainting” it, as you so racistly put it.

      The problem is Ancestry is using an untested algorithm. They should have rolled out the larger reference populations first, then rolled out the algorithm in a separate beta and compared the changes.

    • ANONYMOUS 21 October 2018 / 4:28 am

      Literally it doesn’t say everyone is African. 🙄 I hardly ever see anyone with African before or after the update. My results are Britain, Wales, and NW Europe; Ireland & Scotland; and Germanic Europe. It matches my paper trail. Imagine that. Did it ever occur to you that the people showing African actually have African ancestry? What a crazy idea, especially in America where white men raped black women continuously for about 300 years. It sounds like you just have a problem with people of color since you think migrants are tainting Europe.

  29. SP 10 October 2018 / 10:56 am

    I have found the latest update of of Ethnicity Estimate less plausible. Recent in depth DNA research of Britain has found strong links between German and French DNA over much of England. However there are areas where people have very homogenous DNA indicating little movement of these people and little influence from those outside of this. Welsh DNA has been found to be homogenous sharing similarities with the Basque. Looking at my family based on births, deaths, and marriage records going back to 1650 it seems they remained in a small area in Wales. There is Welsh on the other side of my family also. The update dropped the Iberian Peninsula (15%) which I considered plausible given the similarities between Welsh and Basque DNA. The Welsh and the English DNA have been found to be quite different in this in depth DNA study. I think the large groupings that Ancestry have used simply subsumed the discrete Welsh DNA: It may have removed noise but also reduced sensitivity. I will continue to review updates but also review latest in depth research as my interest in DNA and ancestry continues.

    • anonymous 20 October 2018 / 10:45 pm

      I’m a bit concerned that Ancestry’s geneticists call Yorkshire the “most British” DNA when separate academic studies into Yorkshire DNA have found huge Scandinavian influence there.

  30. Lex 13 October 2018 / 11:23 pm

    My Ancestry results don’t make sense at all. I went from 30% Western European, 22% Southern European, 18% Ireland/Scotland/Wales, 17% Iberian Peninsula, 10% Scandinavia, 1% North Africa, <1% Great Britain, and <1% Middle East to 93% French and 7% England. Everything else is gone. What in the world is going on with your system Ancestry? Both of my parents may have a lot of French, but there is no way I am that much. And both of them also have German, Greek, and Scandinavia in their DNA. Great Britain and Italian are on my mom while Irish is on my dad. I'll see what 23andMe has to say about this.

    • anonymous 20 October 2018 / 10:46 pm

      I found 23andMe WAY more accurate than both the pre- and post-update AncestryDNA estimates.

  31. Kelly 20 October 2018 / 5:14 pm

    am even more confused now that my mother has done the dna Test. In my old estimate I had small percentages of middle eastern and Turkish . With the new update Turkish and middle eastern have disappeared. My mother just did the test and she came back with 15% Turkish and 6% middle eastern which is more in line with my old estimate. How is it possible that the Turkish and middle eastern have disappeared from my new results when they clearly had it right the first time since my mother’s results clearly show Turkish and middle eastern?

  32. K. T. 28 October 2018 / 6:35 pm

    I also find the ancestry.com update very unconvincing. Previous results matched quite closely to my research. After the update western European and English (both proven in my mother’s family tree) were eliminated. I might have bought this, except my Finnish ancestry was up from 50% (from my father’s side) to 66%. If they had upped the Swedish or Norwegian aspects , I might have been fooled, as these groups did make their way around Europe. The Finnish? Hard to explain, except that ancestry.com had trouble with their algorithm and decided to cram some results into existing categories, hoping we wouldn’t question it.

  33. Krautasaurus 13 November 2018 / 1:58 am

    My new results are ridiculous. I went from 9% English, and 46% German (Europe West) … to 58% Engish and 5% German. I now have no idea what I am. All of my records including my last name and many last names in my tree, are German. On one side is English too, but the closer ancestors most recent) were German. Hot headed ones. Now I’m hardly German at all? I’ve wasted a LOT of time and money on ancestry and am thoroughly disgusted.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *