Image of DNA test kits

DNA Testing: A Case Study With Staggering Conclusions

Read this DNA testing case study before throwing your money at the genealogy DNA testing companies. Maybe you’ve read some reviews or seen a list of “the top DNA tests,” but have you ever seen actual results? This article takes you through an actual DNA testing case study. It compares the detailed results from the six major DNA testing companies, pointing out the strengths and weaknesses of each. The study concludes with solid recommendations – no hemming, hawing, or hedging. Following the recommendations will save you money.

This report compares the quantity of DNA matches from six different companies at six unique matching thresholds. It also lists the major genealogical features and tools available at each company, along with standard pricing.  The case study compares the results of the six major genealogical DNA testing and matching sites: Ancestry, FamilyTreeDNA, MyHeritage, 23andMe, LivingDNA with FindMyPast, and GEDmatch.

This is Part 1 of a 2-part case study. Part 2, DNA Ancestry Heritage Tests Are A Complete Farce covers the heritage testing and reporting.

DNA and CentiMorgans

Genetic DNA testing has a unique and often confusing vocabulary.  However, we will quickly cover the basics.  The first thing you need to know is that there are three types of genealogical DNA and three types of testing:

  1. Y-Chromosome DNA is passed from father to son
  2. mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) is passed from the mother to each child
  3. autosomal DNA is comprised of the 22 chromosome pairs that are a mixture from your parents

There are unique tests and reports for each.  This case study covers autosomal DNA testing, the most popular form of DNA testing.

The second thing you need to know is that the amount of DNA two people share is expressed in centiMorgans (cM). Humans have about 7,000 cM of autosomal DNA. We get one-half of our DNA from each of our parents, which means we share about 3,500 cM with each parent.  The quantity falls off quickly as we move out further on our trees.  The averages and ranges for various relationships are:

  • 1st cousins: 866 cM (396 – 1397)
  • 2nd cousins: 229 cM (41 – 592)
  • 3rd cousins: 73 cM (0 – 234)
  • 4th cousins: 35 cM (0 – 139)
  • 5th cousins: 25 cM (0 – 117)
  • 6th cousins: 18 cM (0 – 71)

The third thing you need to understand is that with the exception of your parents and children, the amount of DNA you share with other relatives can vary widely.  For example, we share 73cM of DNA with our third cousins on average, but the amount can range from zero to 234.  You can learn more about centiMorgans and relationship ranges on our Genetic Genealogy page.

DNA Testing Case Study Results

Now that you have a basic understanding of the terminology, let’s compare the results from six DNA testing companies.  The DNA used in this DNA case study is my own, and the report reflects actual results.

The table below is broken into three sections: DNA match quantities, tools, and pricing.  The DNA Matches section shows the quantity of matches above various thresholds.  The first tier is above 100cM, the second tier is above 75cM, etc.  Many experts believe that values below 20cM are unreliable, and I, therefore, have a separate tier for that group. Please note that 23andMe cuts off its matching reports at 25cM.

DNA Testing Comparisons

Ancestry is the largest testing company and has the largest database, which is a key factor in finding DNA matches.  My AncestryDNA test has identified 89,258 DNA matches for me – 10x more than any other testing company, but about 97% of those matches (86,548) are below 20cM, a level that some might consider unreliable.  However, using the other tools at Ancestry, I have discovered valid relatives and new ancestors from many of these matches.  Ancestry easily has the most matches in the > 100cM tier, which are the highest quality matches.

FamilyTreeDNA produced the largest quantity of matches in three different tiers: > 50cM, > 25cM, and > 20cM.  It appears their cutoff for reporting is 20cM, although I cannot explain why there are 14 reported matches below that level.

MyHeritage has a decent quantity of matches, and it has the best lineup of tools in my opinion (more on that later).

23andMe had disappointing matching results, and the company appears to be completely lacking in relationship-finding tools.  This is the only site that does not support a family tree, which is probably the most basic of all genealogical tools.  23andMe might compare better if we were looking at health-related genetics, but as a relationship finding, family tree building resource, it has very little to offer.

LivingDNA and FindMyPast have teamed up with the former to perform the DNA testing and analysis, while the latter is providing the tools for genealogical research.  Please note that these are UK-based firms, and therefore the DNA database currently consists mostly of UK residents.  I (the test taker in this case study) am a multi-generational North American descendant, and so my quantity of matches is expected to be lower. A UK resident will likely see different results.

GEDmatch is not a testing company, although you can upload any other test to the website for further analysis free of charge. This was one of the original DNA analysis companies, and its database is used by many academic researchers. It has a rich set of tools.

Shared Matches:  All these companies have the ability to identify DNA matches that are common to both you and another tester.

Upload Other Test: Ancestry and 23andMe are the only two companies that require you to buy the DNA test from them.  All the others allow you to upload another company’s DNA test.

Clustering and Auto-Triangulation: Clustering is the process of segmenting your matches into groups that are common with each other.  The most basic example is two clusters – those from your father’s side of the family and those from your mother’s side.  In practice, it is beneficial to expand this out to 8 or 16 clusters (great grandparents or great-great-grandparents).  Triangulation is the process of identifying the common ancestor between three DNA samples.  MyHeritage excels in this area, and Ancestry provides some group identification tools that can help facilitate manual clustering efforts.

Upload a Tree: The ability to upload a tree is key.  You do not want to develop and maintain a tree at each site.  It is much easier to keep your main research at one site, then download your tree from there and upload it to other sites.  All but 23andMe provide this function (another strike against 23andMe).

Common Ancestor in Tree: Ancestry says I have 89,258 DNA matches.  Where do I begin? Fortunately, Ancestry and MyHeritage show which of my DNA matches also have a tree containing an ancestor that is common to my tree.  Instead of scratching my head as to where this distant cousin might fit in my tree, I now have a clear road map.

Other Tools:  All these sites have many additional tools, too numerous to list and comment on.  Many have chromosome browsers, which I consider a more advanced tool. I have identified the tools I believe are most important in deciding which DNA test to purchase.

Pricing:  These are the prices for DNA collection, testing, and basic reporting.  There may be extra charges for additional site functions and access to tools. All companies have a list price and offer various promotions throughout the year.  With a little patience, you can save some money and not have to pay the full list price.

DNA Testing Case Study Conclusion and Recommendations

For anyone wanting to take a genealogical DNA test to help determine ancestral relationships, I recommend the following:

  1. Buy Ancestry’s DNA test when on sale. Try for a price of $79 or better.
  2. Download Ancestry’s raw DNA test files, and then upload those files to FamilyTreeDNA, MyHeritage, LivingDNA, and GEDmatch. You will now have your DNA test results at five different sites for the price of one.
  3. Build your family tree at WikiTree. It is a completely free site, while some of the DNA testing companies might charge for this.
  4. Download the GEDcom file (a standard file format for moving trees between websites and applications) of your tree from WikiTree, and then upload your GEDcom tree to Ancestry, FamilyTreeDNA, MyHeritage, FindMyPast, LivingDNA, and GEDmatch. You will now have your family tree at seven different sites for free.
  5. Use and play with all the free features at these sites before spending any additional money.

Part 2 of this case study, DNA Ancestry Heritage Tests Are A Complete Farce, is required reading if your objective is to learn about your ancestral heritage and ethnicity estimates.

Further Reading

Genetic Genealogy – an introduction to DNA, DNA testing, and the randomness of generational DNA transmission.

Genealogy Websites – a summary of the companies and websites discussed in this article.

Home Page – Rowland Genealogy is much more than just a tree, and it is for much more than just Rowland families. Take a look.

——

If you are a Rowland or have a Rowland in your family tree, then you need to subscribe to the Rowland Genealogy Newsletter.

11 thoughts on “DNA Testing: A Case Study With Staggering Conclusions”

  1. Oh that’s southern Germany so that probably won’t roll into England although I suppose it counts towards the rather nebulous NW Europe. Interesting Living DNA result as they are usually credited with accurate UK but weaker on other countries that Ancestry. All goes to show it’s best to rely on document based research as far back as possible rather than doubtful ethnicity estimates as a guide.

  2. I wonder why no German, quite a lot of Germans have tested so it’s not lack of data. Is your German from NW Germany, if so it might get rolled into the Eng & NW Europe being so close to Angle and Saxon DNA?

  3. Just an update on how fluid Ancestry ethnicity origins swing in the wind. I am now 68% England predominantly East Anglia, 16% Sweden and Denmark, 9% Scottish, 3% Germanic Europe, 2% Wales, 2% Irish. It’s now closer to my real ancestry as my family is heavily East Anglia but the rest is still strange. 16% Denmark/Sweden sort of fits with my paternal Norse origin but that was 1000 or so years ago. Autosomal tests are said to only go back accurately maximum 500yrs. Irish and Scottish sort of fits with the Norse but the %ages are small and within error zones. My only conclusion so far is to assume the largest % is probably about right and treat the rest with a degree of doubt. I think a lot of these analyses are based on where living populations were born and I suspect this will get less indicative over time as population is much more mobile now.

    1. My most recent update shows little change: 52% Scottish, 37% Eng & NW Eur, 5% Norway, 3% Sewden, 2% Ireland. Additionally, it still has my German at 0%, when I believe it should be 25%-27%.

  4. Pingback: DNA Ancestry Heritage Tests Are A Complete Farce - Rowland Genealogy

  5. Here is my comparison of Y testing results between Living DNA and FTDNA. Living DNA gave me R1a-Z284 and FTDNA Y111 test gave M198, so LivingDNA won that round by going a bit deeper. I then did the FTDNA Y700 test and that gave BY95335 which is far deeper than LivingDNA. End result is you pay your money and make your choice, for deepest results Y700 is best, value for money and a guide to origins Living DNA wins,

    Cheers
    Nick

  6. Ancestry just notified me that my admixture heritage results have been updated.
    My prior 18% Scotland & Ireland is now 52% Scotland and 2% Ireland.
    My prior 67% England and NW Europe is now 35%

    1. My Ancestry result has also changed Ron but I am very suspicious of the results. Suddenly I have 17% Scottish (previously Zero) and 10% Welsh (also previously Zero), I am now only 58% English. Those numbers do not stack up with my known last 500 years ancestry, which is almost exclusively East Anglia and predominantly Suffolk. I am fairly lucky that my Ancestors (Paternal and Maternal) were mostly farm labourers and hardly moved for hundred of years, in fact my Rowland family lived in the same village for almost 400 years (some still do).

      The LivingDNA result stacks perfectly with my research and the old Ancestry profile was also very close, now it is apparently way off.

      From what I have seen on Social Media a large number of folk have had the same sudden appearance of (or large increase in) Scottish ancestry. I am not sure how far back Ancestry claims to analyse but it all seems very odd.

      I have a suspicion that they have a Scottish Viking reference sample (or samples) which they are assuming means anyone similar has Scottish roots, East Anglia also has strong Viking roots (it was under Danelaw for a couple of hundred years) and I am guessing Ancestry have assumed that DNA is Scottish in origin rather than the East Anglian Vikings and Scottish Vikings having shared Scandinavian DNA roots. (if you see what I mean)

      There are certainly a lot of confused English people at the moment 🙂

      Cheers
      Nick

  7. Good observations! I can only speak for FTDNA, but for their YDNA Ancestral Origins report, they merely use the information provided by those testees that match to you as for where they believe their earliest paternal ancestor originated. They ask that one not list “United States” if the earliest known ancestor is found in the US (unless one is Native American) but people do it anyway! Also many times people love to make fanciful guesses as to their ancestry with no proof, so in my opinion this report should be taken with a grain of salt! The YDNA Haplogroup information is much more reliable for ancestral origins but probably not as specific as a lot of people would like.

    The Autosomal test, however, is correlated to scientific genetic testing of representative populations from 26 specific regions. This should be more reliable but obviously there are very few “pure” populations in the world any more! This is why, for instance, they only report British Isles as opposed to Scotland or Wales. Clearly the population of Ireland or Scotland or England is not genetically homogeneous, so I’m not sure how a test can scientifically pinpoint one’s origins that specifically. Just my thoughts!
    Jamie

  8. Interesting study Ron. I am doing a similar comparison between the Y test result on LivingDNA (I opted for the full test) and the FTDNA Y tests. I have had to buy a Y700 as the Y111 didn’t go deep enough to compare the two.

    I agree about LivingDNA for UK analysis, my recent ancestry result came out spot on to my ancestry research (I am British and live there). However you are right about Ancestry for tree research matching, it certainly is the best of the bunch for that.

    Nick

Leave a Comment

Scroll to Top