Posted by Ancestry Team on May 31, 2019 in AncestryDNA, News

We are thrilled to celebrate a groundbreaking Ancestry milestone with all of you: more than 15 million customers have received DNA results!

We are honored to have played a role in empowering the journeys of personal discovery for over 15 million people around the world through AncestryDNA, it is a true sign of how deeply important it is for people to connect and learn about their past. But this is just the beginning. As the network continues to grow, we can deliver even more value to our members, including more granular insights about heritageand compelling new paths to learn about ourselves using genetics.

New Communities: As the AncestryDNA network grows, Ancestry scientists can refine and discover more communities using Ancestry’s patented Genetic Communities™ technology – a proprietary technology that can connect people through their DNA to the places their ancestors lived and the paths they followed to get there over the past 75-300 years. Ancestry recently released 94 new and updated AncestryDNA communities for customers of African American and Afro-Caribbean descent, with even more communities launching soon.

Refined Ethnicity Insights: As more people take the AncestryDNA test, Ancestry scientists are able to add additional samples to our reference panel, paving the way for more refined insights for members about their genetically inherited ethnicity. Thanks to the largest consumer DNA network, AncestryDNA is preparing another update for later this year which will include new ethnic regions and providing many members with a more detailed view of their heritage.

Even More Matches and Discoveries: The size of the AncestryDNA network directly increases the quality and quantity of discoveries people can make using tools such as DNA Matches, and one of our newest features, ThruLines™. ThruLines (currently in BETA) can show common ancestors that members may share with their DNA matches and give a clear and simple view of how all matches are connected through that shared ancestor. With this innovation, combined with millions of Ancestry member trees, family tree building has never been easier, and the discoveries people can make are unprecedented. Additionally, now that the AncestryDNA network has over 15 million members, each AncestryDNA customer receives an average of 50,000 total matches – and that number grows by 2%-5% each month as more people join the network.

Every day, our team is working towards delivering products that both optimize and expand what is already the world’s most robust consumer DNA network, and we are proud to be the #1 selling DNA test on the market.

Thank you to all of you, our members, who have made this 15 million milestone possible. This is just the beginning of the journey.

102 Comments

  1. Brenda Kay Schaecher

    Would be great that when you are attaching a Gallery Image to multiple individuals with the same last name you could check each one at the same time instead of having to keep typing the name. You select a person and it jumps back, then enter the name again and jumps back, enter the name again jumps back. Being able to select multiple then saying okay would be great.

    • Tina Randolph

      I was adopted at the age 4. I still remember faces of where I came from, will this help me find my real family? I had a VERY BAD experience with the people that adopted me, all I ever wanted was to find even one person. I still feel connected to my real family! Always have,I remember asking about what my real name was,my adopted father said it was Mary. I don’t know if that is true or not. I remember living out in a country home with a garden and I always used to walk under the electric fence to go see a white horse. A little bit about 8 or 9 always would come get me.He tried to carry me,guess I was fed good! I still remember his face. I wish I could just tell them that I always thought of them and my love only grew stronger over the years. Can this site help me find some of my real family members?

      • Kathie

        Tina – in our family this year, we have gathered TWO missing members that we had no clue about. One is a son of my sister’s son. The other is a brother that we did not know existed. I am sure that eventually someone will show up to match you!

      • leslie rubinson

        there are several facebook groups that have search angels to help adoptees connect with their birth families.

      • Julia Suazo Ferras

        I got the kit for Christmas. It took me forever to do it. My kids kept asking me if I had send it in. So I finally did it. Wow Thank you!!! This is a great gift. I’m having so excited to see a generation I knew nothing about. If anyone is looking for a special gift, well this is it! Thanks again I love it!!

      • Barbara Hulsizer

        Using genetic genealogy techniques, just last week I helped a DNA cousin identify her birth father and previously helped two other people the same way. I even identified a 3rd great grandfather that family researchers had been trying to figure out for a couple of decades and another person find living siblings.

        I suggest that you take the test, and learn about genetic genealogy. It’s a real slog to work through your highest cousin matches to see what they have in common with you. It’s the technique that police are using to identify suspects in cold cases using a public DNA database (not Ancestry). You might also want to test with several companies and upload to the public database. Its a lot of crazy-hard work but it can be done. The more places you test, the better. Best of luck to you. I hope your story turns out well. That’s not always the case so, if not, at least you’ll know your story.

      • Pam

        If you do the Ancestry DNA testing ,you have a chance of finding them if any of them have done the testing. I know of people that have found there children through this.

      • Louise

        Tina: You may want to investigate it you can obtain your original birth certificate (one with your biological parents) from the state that you were born in. It would depend on the law’s of that state. I’m no expert…just a thought. Good luck.

        • Louise

          Sorry – I didn’t read the following comment that your state wouldn’t release them. I think taking a DNA test would be a good first step, if you are truly interested in finding family members. I took a DNA test through Ancestry and through another site, and found many close matches.

  2. Brenda Kay Schaecher

    Also adding the gallery button next to the hint button at top so you can open your whole gallery at once so you can edit them and sort by title, to help connect one image to multiple individuals would be great. Then delete the rest, also having the auto fill on images as well

  3. Sheila Wood

    I wish those people that do not have a tree could not be put on line till they have a tree. And not say private! It is a waste of time.

    • David T Johnston

      I have a private tree. I’ve never turned down anyone who has asked to see it. I enjoy participating with cousins and find I can often help them with additional discoveries. See a private Tree you’d like opened to you, just ask!
      Dave J

      • V. Davies

        I agree about having a tree Private but it is still an individual choice. While some people see it as annoying I see it as protecting my research. I was public once and someone choose to take my information throw it in a hat – shake it up – spit out ridiculous connections and post his stupid tree on Ancestry for many others to copy (and please don’t copy) jot down info and check for your own sources. This man had my grandmother married to her father-in-law and her actual husband as her son. Now how stupid is that. My wish is that every DNA kit must be connected to a minimal tree.. at least 3 names even if Private. I did my DNA here in 2014 and I have yet to received ANY UNSOLICITED EMAILS ASKING ME FOR INFORMATION. Not once! I write and get replies but I’d say about 4 out 10 emails will see replies. People aren’t interested.

        • caith

          And sometimes they do not reply for 3.5 years, in my case this week; and another for 2.5 years. We cannot control other people’ s lives. They have their own priorities.

        • Wayne Brown

          Yes the public trees are most effective for information exchange and every detail does need to be checked. Like many others I see no point in playing a game of ask 20 questions with private tree owners, we just leave them be. I chose a public tree and this shares the research of me and many cousins, which others are building on over time. One cousin recently was inspired to make a diversion on a trip and spend a day copying photos, trees back to 1735, stories and news clippings from family papers at an archive in Dorchester, UK. The fake trees which have scooped up our researched tree and added it to 100,000 names jumbled together are annoying however.

      • Barbara Hulsizer

        Sorry dear, it’s not about you. People do the test for different reasons. I too wish more people would at least put in their parent’s and grandparent’s names, but they don’t and we move on.

    • Nancy

      I turned my tree public so that adoptee cousins will get clues on finding their parents. 😀 After several contacted me over the years, I thought I might as well put my tree to greater use.

    • Rebecca Hasie

      And how about those people who have not started a tree for themselves, but they want to know all you know about their relatives, which in most cases are distant relatives for you? And want you to do their work! UGH! And, I’m to the point I don’t think anyone with a PRIVATE tree should be able to see all the PUBLIC hints. WHY? Sorry, I had to vent!

      • Barbara Hulsizer

        Sounds like you had a bad experience or two. My tree is public and well researched. About 90% built on DNA matches. I don’t mind helping people at all if I can. And if I can’t, I simply say “sorry.” And I move on.

      • Rebecca Sonnick

        I agree people with private trees should not be allowed to see public trees. Never, ever.

      • PF1993

        Sorry Rebecca Hasie and Rebecca Sonnick, it’s not about you. People test for different reasons and most with private trees don’t care about your information, so you can give up on the idea that private tree owners are mining your info while keeping their own to themselves. Serious researchers use records and not other trees so you’re kidding yourself if you think that people with private trees are hoarding their info while pillaging yours. As a private tree owner, I respond to anyone that messages me but I don’t have to serve you up my family tree publicly just because you think I should. There are plenty of adoptees that don’t have any information to fill out a tree with, hence their reasons for testing or researching. Each person has their own reason for looking into their family history and it’s not your place to decide that “John Doe didn’t give me their pedigree with a big red bow so they shouldn’t be allowed to see anyone’s tree.” If you don’t like it, make your tree private. There are plenty of us who have had our ancestors’ documents and photos taken and attached to completely unrelated people. Again, not your place to police others and say their reasons for having a private tree are not good enough for your standards. Or how about the person who is trying to research without causing pain to living individuals? Lots of reasons people have private trees, so you shouldn’t get so convinced that anyone who has tested owes you anything.

    • Dorie Sheppard

      I soooo agree; without even one generation from “self” entered, there should not be a way to search.

      • PF1993

        Dorie: that’s a pretty self-entitled opinion you have there. How about an adoptee or foundling that literally knows NOTHING about their parents? Wow, just wow at the hubris.

    • Tina Randolph

      I’m sorry I don’t have a family tree. I don’t feel that I am wasting time. I am only trying to find my real family members,I was adopted when I was four years old. I’m now 60years old, for some reason the year I was adopted is one of the few years they still have birth and adoption records sealed.

        • Harold Germany

          Tina, I will from time to time, review all of my matches, except those way down the line, and I will bypass those that do not have a tree even if they are a close match. If the match is really close, I will send a message. But normally I don’t. If you do have a tree and the match is pretty good, I am more likely to send you an inquiry. I have been able to provide family connections to orphans because they did put a tree out there. Just put your name in the tree and for parents, you could say Unknown Father and Unknown Mother. Wishing you success in whatever you do.

    • Ani

      Most users on Ancestry with private trees are more than happy to allow you to view their trees and answer questions. The majority have closed their trees due to a negative experience with someone in the community coping all their information and photos without permission, or they do not want their modern personal info publicly displayed. If you ask politely, and assure them that you’ll keep any info you get from the tree private, they’re fine. You can add information privately by setting the quick edit profile to living individual, rather than decease individual and put the death info in your note section, or as a custom fact in the fact section, or storing it off line. Others close their trees because they like using their tree, as a messy work in progress, and not having everything on it be proof positive. There didn’t use to be a way to keep things you were holding for consideration anyplace other than your shoe box. So many of us like saving things we find to the individual so it’s handy. Many times you’ll come just can’t connect it yet. It’s nice to have it near by so you can compare it to other pieces of information as they come in. Some of us like keeping a messier tree and don’t want others coping incorrect info, that we have stored for further consideration. I wish Ancestry has added something in BETA that DNA matches could see that reflected that the user was open to being contacted by matches, even though they have a private tree. Another group of users who close their trees because they do not want their family’s information being added to sites outside of Ancestry where no one can delete it, as it’s the site’s policy to never remove info that has been added, even if that info, compromises another family’s online safety. I would not characterize all private trees holders as people that are not interested in collaborating. The majority are.

  4. Cathy Jenkins

    I used to get so excited when I would get new matches only to see this person has no tree with which to compare our relationship. I have contacted several of “my “relatives” but they do not reply. What is the use of being informed of the relationship without any documented proof other than being told by Ancestry DNA we are a match? I have worked over 30 years on my tree to have a paper trail. Why do you list people as a relative if they have no tree. I grow weary of contacting a possible relative not to be contacted in return. If these people think your company or That i am going to compile their tree for them they are sadly mistaken. Some people have posted a tree but everyone on the tiny tree is marked private. How are we supposed to work with stuff like this?

    I have friends tell me they have “circles”. Please explain circles.
    Thank you.

    • Tina Randolph

      I’m so sorry, I don’t understand that either! If course I am very sensitive and knowing myself I would be kinda feeling rejected. That’s just me, I am always being told that I am just way too sentimental wear my heart on my sleeve.
      I pray that they SOON discover their mishap, to put your heart at ease.

      • Brenda Freiert

        Tina, I understand why you don’t have a tree, I watched a youtube video about adoptees. Krista the barefoot genealogist said that you can start a tree, by putting unknown father, or unknown mother. I am just suggesting you do not have to.

    • Jojo

      People don’t respond for all sorts of reasons. Some forget the email they used. Some use a temp email and it disappears. Some aren’t really comfortable using a computer. Others are managed by someone else who doesn’t see fit to reply and then there are the people who are afraid everyone on the net is trying to scam them and are afraid to respond.

      When someone is a close enough match (say 2ng cousin) and they don’t reply to messaging, then I will sometimes search for them on the net. I’ve had a few successes finding people this way.

      Google can be helpful and there are a whole slew of people finder apps to choose from although all generally require a payment for detailed info. However, if you search a person and location (if possible) among different apps, some reveal more info than others for free. There are also the social media apps like Facebook, where you can find people.

      You might find an email address or a phone number. You might find 10 phone numbers and have to call them all. They might be the right person, they might not and they might hang up on you. Such is life.

    • Joyce

      Cathy “circles” are going away. They are being replaced. What they are/were is when people had the same ancestors they would group up all in a circle with links to each other…it was pretty much a waste of time if you’d been working your tree and also DNA…

      I already knew everyone in my “circles” long before ANC came out with it.

      These new DNA features and much, much better and more useful.

      • Barbara Hulsizer

        Agree 100%. While the thru-lines are not 100% accurate, they work VERY well. I consider them hints because they are also based on trees. There are only a few where I’ve found the thru-lines to be incorrect. But, since I actually research and follow the records, I can usually find out the truth.

    • Harold Germany

      Cathy, I think that a lot of people just want to see their dna results and are not interested in anything else.

  5. Rondall Carter

    Hi, I think that it is great that you are trying to improve the site. What you have done, has caused the user to check after addition to our tree for error in the tree. You are not testing your changes enough for error. I work with many other genealogists, and their seeing the same problem with their tree. In the last couple of month, I have noticed that there are duplicates in my tree, that was not there before. We need a way to control duplicates. We also need a way to find in our space that are not connected. I worked for IBM for 35 years as a programmer, we would not allow your method of product testing.

    • Barbara Hulsizer

      Odd. My tree is 58,900 strong. I don’t experience the problem. I de-dup and check for errors twice a year using Family TreeMaker. Ancestry has NEVER added anybody to my tree.

  6. Swen Nilsson

    I share much of the frustration expressed by the others making comments. Way too many people with no trees or private trees, to many people too lazy to respond to even the most polite inquiries. Perhaps Ancestry should think about offering a discount or coupon for people who post a public tree with at least 4 generation? It would obviously not solve all the problems, but might encourage folks to post their trees.

    • Jojo

      Ancestry should regularly (say every 6 months) auto verify a members contact info (send an email or if they don’t have email, leave a VM). Unsure what the penalty should be for not responding but there should be something done.

  7. d conley

    I too complained in the past about all the private trees that showed up in my DNA matches. I suggested that they provide a filter so we can avoid those, and now with filters in place it does make it easier to navigate. Now I find that i have duplicate people in my trees that don’t notify me of such. That is a true pain to discover. I have overlapping family groups, and I need to have a way to find these duplicates before I re-enter a whole line again. There needs to be name/dates/places triggers put in place to bring up possible matches.

    I am also not a fan of the “potential” parents links. It’s too easy to get lazy with that and put a wrong person in place. There need to also be some additional information provided along with the “potential” person, i.e., dates, places, etc. This makes it possible for some very wrong directions taken and erroneous information added.

    • Joyce

      Hi, I too don’t care for potential parents the way it is set up right now. I can’t look at the info supporting those parents on a tree w/ the current configuration. I don’t mind getting the hint, but I’d like to be able to check it out before saying yeah or neigh. Yes, I can open a new page in browser and manually do a search for those people and see if i find them, but ANC pulled it from other trees…have a link we can look at before we have to say yes or no to potential parents.

      Also it is only attaching the parents, not their children.

      RE folks griping about pvt trees…while I hate running into a pvt tree sitting behind a DNA match I’d like to know more about, I also have many pvt trees. I work out family lines, look for clues in separate trees…and only after I am sure my research and the answers I come up with are correct, do I copy that info to my main tree, which IS public. Trust me you don’t want to use my pvt DNA trees as a guide as my theories about who is who in those trees might be wrong…

      There are also folks who try to help adoptees, and those trees are sheer madness, with tons of folks, many not connected to each other, notes all over the name field. You don’t want to copy those trees either…

      I think what might help the problem with emailing person after person and getting no response would be for folks to be able to turn email on and off, but also have that on their profile page. You could have an alert that says “not accepting emails” when that is their setting.

      You can’t force people to have public trees, you can’t force someone to put more than 2 or 3 private people on their tree…I know it is frustrating, but it is their right to keep their info pvt and it is their right not to want to put more on their tree. It is frustrating, but it cannot and will never change. It’s not their job to give you answers-those folks obviously have no interest in family history.

      • Karen

        I wish people would list their regular email addresses.Those seem to get checked more often the address listed here.

  8. lee swann

    I have NOT found your DNA results helpful, at all. I KNOW for a fact, I am 1/4 Cherokee, but your DNA “results” do not show ANY Native American lineage.

    • Swen Nilsson

      You may want to try testing with a different company to see if the DNA results are any different. My own observation after working with DNA testing for quite a few years with different companies is that the match information is VERY reliable (at least until you get to 5th cousin and beyond), but the ethnic estimates that unfortunately people seem to put so much stock in are still a pretty imprecise science.
      One other point, however, while I am NOT NOT NOT saying this is the situation in YOUR specific case (as I do not know anything about it), in the 40 plus years I have been doing genealogical research, in probably 85-90 percent of the cases where people thought they had some Native American ancestry, it turned out to be incorrect. One needs to try and keep an open mind as to ones’ DNA results, and be willing to at least consider the possibility of NPEs such as adultery, private adoptions, etc. Also, it was not uncommon in many American Indian tribes to spare the small children of settler families killed in a raid, and these children would be raised as tribal members and may not have even been aware that they were in fact of European descent. There are other possibilities other than a botched test.

    • caith

      Lee, if you think the NA heritage is on your mitochondrial line (mother to mother to mother back in time, that is easily proven with the mtDna test which can only be done at FTDNA testing company. Native Americans have their own haplogroups that prove NA heritage.
      If your NA heritage is elsewhere in your tree, autosomal dna which shows cousinship on all your lines does not pick up dna much past 5th cousin say the scientists. Although, dna is random and it could possibly pick up slightly farther back in time.

      If you upload to GEDmatch (free), there are many different calculators to determine your ethnicity. This is the easiest thing to do. I think the ethnicity calculators are still free.

    • Peggi Benson

      If you know for a fact you are 1/4 Cherokee, you might be able to put together a paper trail which would be better proof. Even if your DNA shows NA, it won’t specify a tribe. Being 1/4 NA means at least one of your grandparents were full blood.

    • PF1993

      How do you know for a “FACT”? You do realize that it’s the most common family myth, right? What evidence do you have in the way of documents? Not family stories, not photos of ancestors with “high cheekbones” but documents? If you truly are 1/4, then you know which of your ancestors were listed on the Rolls.

  9. Susan

    You are concentrating so much on DNA you seem to be not investing anything into your sources and syncing.

  10. Bill Greggs

    I really appreciate the new ThruLines capability and all of the features you have added to make its use more efficient, especially accessing it from the pedigree view and being able to choose among the several tests that I manage. Also the clean view from the selected ancestor to the various matches in other lines. Much more powerful than Circles.

    I have several suggestions to further improve the ThruLines experience:
    – From the ThruLines view of a particular ancestor it would be nice to be able to see and click on their parents to be able to follow the line and match hints backward.
    – There are many actual matches missing that may have only a few generations in their tree, but I have been able to track back to a common ancestor and have put the line to the match in my tree. Also, there are some Ancestry.com identified common ancestors that do not show up in ThruLines.

    One major complaint, unrelated to ThruLines. For over a year now, after adding a record to a person or family, I get the dreaded “We’re Sorry….” page and I have to take several steps to get back to the person I was researching. This has slightly improved that last month or so, but it is really frustrating. I am using the Chrome Browser on a MacBook Pro and have a 10MB internet connection.

    Thanks for your efforts to continuously improve Ancestry research tools.

    Bill Greggs

  11. Joyce

    I just found out about the new thru-lines application in family view. Fantastic addition to the great new tools you have given us, BUT…there is a tweak that should be made.

    Currently you are showing the icon for DNA link when I am the only person it is linked to. It should be pretty simple to program the new program to only show the icon when there are 2 DNA matches to that person.

    The way it is right now, the icon lights up at everyone in your pedigree-a match only to myself should not be showing up with an icon. It wastes my time to look at all those folks only to find it is ME, and only ME that the icon is on for.

    I LOVE all the new tools Ancestry! As always there as some bugs/issues to work out, and s0ome site disruptions while you add new things or change something we didn’t like…but you’ve also been great at responding to suggestions we make too!

  12. Karen

    I have one little pet peeve. Some of my relatives that we have both searched are now using your new Thrulines and seeing stuff in other trees and not checking it out. It just keeps adding it to their tree. Then someone else sees it and it becomes a mess! I’ll keep my tree private but do share when asked, but then to have them destroy the line by adding a bunch of stuff that can’t possibly be true is disturbing. I also wish there was a way when hints are put on to one of my people, that if that particular hint already shows in my tree – then don’t call it a hint! Its already there! Just saying!!!!

  13. Sue

    Unfortunately, your Customer Service is unable to support your 15 million users! A member is unable to email customer support, the call wait time to be connected can extend to over an hour, there is no option for a call back, and once you do connect you are unable to speak to technical support directly. In trying to correct an account error, the first representative who couldn’t resolve the issue said it could take 24 to 48 hours to hear back from tech support. Another phone call to a second representative who was quite flippant (after an hour long wait) said it could take a week to correct the account issue. Customer Service for your 15 million users should be your #1 priority! I welcome any suggestions as to how to reach tech support at Ancestry. Email? Direct phone line? Thank you

    • Jojo

      [lol] Welcome to Ancestry customer service, one of the worst customer service experiences in existence. Everything you said is true. Calling CS is a grand waste of your time. If you are an experienced user, 90% of the time they will not know the answer. When that happens, try asking for a supervisor. Sometimes they have enough experience to be helpful. As for reporting errors, don’t even bother because no one is ever going to fix them.

  14. Tina Randolph

    I think that you have brought me to the wrong page. I can only pray that I didn’t upset any member

  15. Joyce

    Ancestry can you please stop calling Ancestry Trees as multiple sources when you search for family trees? I try to look for the trees with the most sources when trying to learn more about individuals I see in a tree and this is especially important when you suggest someone is my ancestor and i’m trying to figure that out.

    I repeatedly find trees that YOU say has 7 or 9 sources when indeed all they did was copy tree data from 7 or 9 trees in the attach all option when copying tree hints. Their tree is really not sourced at all except for copying trees. There are reasons to copy trees, but those should not be considered multiple “sources” when you are citing how many sources are in a family tree. I see tree after tree citing high numbers of sources, yet when I go to their tree, there is ONE source and that is copied from 7 or 9 family trees using the select all button when people copy other ancestry trees that show up as hints.

    You should be counting that as 1 source (family trees) not 7 or 9 sources. It’s great to show there is some kind of source, but not correct for you to say there are 7 or 9 sources. That is misleading when trying to choose the best tree to look at for some information about that individual.

    Copying trees, and not adding any other info to the individual is pretty common, especially when these folks are fringe relations on their tree. I don’t develop all fringe people either, but it’s nice to know before wasting your time looking at trees.

    If I see someone has 5 other trees but all have once source, then that’s a pretty good clue for me to look elsewhere for info instead of wasting my time pulling up their tree.

    There is rampant copying of trees on ancestry.com and no supporting documentation for what is copied. We need to be able to tell the difference from a tree that just copied another tree and actual sources.

    • caith

      My long personal experience here leads me to believe there are some trees with NO sources; because I am guessing their records are stored on their home computers.

      • Joyce

        Yes there are a lot of people who probably have records in their filing cabinet and not on their tree…but the majority I see copied don’t have anything as far as I can tell…you see the same info copied over and over. Somebody probably has or had docs at one time, but those have been lost in the shuffle.

      • Joyce

        FYI I have tracked a lot of ANC tree information to familysearch Pedigree Resource files. I have a cousin who works closely w/ LDS records and familysearch and she told me those files should not be relied upon and may be “going away” soon.

        Once family in particular is giving me fits, ANC has predicted an ancestor but the trees I see are copied from one another. I went to familysearch to see if I could find more info and only found Pedigree resource files and when I looked at sources it said Ancestry.com.

        Everybody is copying from everybody these days, and not backing it up with documents.

        Over the years I have found TONS of trees with serious errors…and people are copying these errors. While I enjoy the hints in the new thru-lines, they cannot be relied on either. You need to research folks the good old fashion way. A paper trail.

        The line giving me trouble sites 6 DNA matches to that line…but every tree I found was copied from another, and the main tree ANC was using is a nightmare…a gazillion people that they really hadn’t figured out and threw the kitchen sink into their tree. And THAT is the tree everyone is copying from.

    • Barbara Hulsizer

      ALL of my current research is based on DNA matches. If you research records first, THEN use trees, your accuracy will improve. I use trees ONLY to detail out what I already know — such as a birth/death dates, middle names and cities. And, I only use the top 3-4 trees who have records. Trees are notoriously innacurate. NOBODY should ever rely on them.

      Also, FYI, when I started out, I used Family TreeMaker exclusively. In that program, trees could only be used one by one. So, on Ancestry, I might have 20+ trees showing up as records. Now I research online only and sync to FTM. As I come across some of those original names, I eliminate all the tree-type records, but I’m not going back in to fix them all.

  16. Jojo

    I discovered a technique that might be useful for some recently.

    I have been searching for my real father on multiple services for a long time now. I’ve gotten as high as 2nd cousin level through DNA matches and connected trees but no 1st cousin level yet.

    When I look through DNA matches on Ancestry, 23andme and MyHeritage, there is no obvious visible way to identify what side of the family they are from (mother or father).

    But I recently discovered that Ancestry groups can be used to gain this insight. I created a ‘mother'(pink) and a ‘father'(blue) group. Then select a DNA match and open in a new tab/window. Then click Shared Matches. If this person matches the side of someone known to be on one side or the other, you can add this person and everyone else on the shared page to the same group! Then when you return to the main page and do a page refresh, you can visually see right away who is in what group!

    I only wish that Ancestry would implement a control to allow me to add EVERYONE on a Shared Match page to a group with a single click, instead of having to do them one by one.

  17. Jojo

    I get some 2nd and a lot of 3rd cousins on 23andme regularly. But on Ancestry, hardly anything new that isn’t a generally useless 4th through 6th cousin. I wonder why?

    On top of that, I NEVER receive any notification from Ancestry of new DNA matches. There should be a contorl with granularity that would say:

    Notify me via email immediately when a DNA match of 3rd, 2nd or 1st cousin (your choice) shows up.

    • Joyce

      Jojo a LOT of adoptees use 23andme probably due to health reports. I generally find people on 23andme who couldn’t care less about genealogy…except for adopted folks.

      I wouldn’t give you 10 cents for 23andme IMO…I get very little useful info from that site and usually if I find a cousin that I can determine a general relationship due to shared matches, I encourage them to get an ANC test and start a tree.

      I have only found about 3 ppl in 15? years on 23andme who answer emails unless they were adopted.

      • Jojo

        I have many more than 3 people on 23andme who have answered my queries. Maybe something to do with your phrasing?

  18. Jojo

    ON my DNA matches page, starting at the 4th-6th cousin level, I am seeing most names that have a small blue circle to the left of the person’s photo. I have no clue what that means. Anyone give me some help on this?

    • Sue

      The blue circle means that it is a match you haven’t viewed. If you clicked on the person and then return to the match, the blue circle will be gone.

  19. Lannie Hartman

    15 million DNA customers !
    New Communities !
    Refined Ethnicity Insights !
    Even More Matches and Discoveries !

    I would hope that with all this exciting news that my DNA results show all the exciting ethnicities Ancestry found in my FIRST test.
    After the first results, and after a time, Ancestry gave us our new, refined ethnicity results of original DNA test !
    The new refined technology changed my DNA ethnicity results drastically…….
    The exciting new technology had eliminated results showing my known ethnicities, and left me with,
    ‘HUH’ ? ‘WAIT…….WHAT’ ?? ???
    Tsk !

    • Barbara Hulsizer

      The original sample size was relatively small in each geographic region. Ancestry has tripled the base to thousands of people known to be living in an area for many generations. The accuracy is pretty good back to only 5th great grandparents. Technology and understanding of genetic ethnicity continues to improve over time. I would prefer a more accurate reflection of reality. The basic stuff hasn’t changed, it’s simply more accurate. If your initial test said you were 100% Russian and now it says you are 100% Native American, then that is an issue. Mine used to say “Scandinavian.” Now it says Western Europe–which is more accurate because I know one ancestor has a German name but his family could have migrated from the North. Also, my English/Irish ancestors are likely to have Scandinavian roots. My “Greek/Italian” disappeared and now says “Iberian” (which is exactly correct). It’s helpful to understand regional history. Wars, conquest and migration plays a role. And don’t forget, ethnicity and nationality are not the same.

  20. Brenda Freiert

    People have spoken about others not having a tree, or having a private tree. People took the DNA test for ethnicity, not interested in the cousin part. No matter if they have a tree or not they are biologically related to you. people have different reasons to take the test. Tina does not have a tree probably because she does not know who her parents are. Adoptees do not put trees up, because they do not know their parents yet. You can not stop people who choose not to have trees or private ones.

    • Barbara Hulsizer

      Agree 100%. Too many people want a company to dictate to their customers. I have DNA cousins without trees and have no clue who they are. I assume they did the test, not because of an interest in genealogy, but simply to learn their ethnicity. I would never be so presumptuous as to demand they provide me with a tree or information about themselves.

  21. Steve Gold

    Ancestry recently gave me information about a previously unknown close relation, almost certainly on this earth because of a NPE about 105 years ago. Using conventional methods, I learned a fair amount about my new cousin, and attempted to contact her. After several weeks with no response to my attempt through Ancestry, I sent her a snail-mail letter that acknowledged what Ancestry had reported to both of us, and told her that I had a fairly strong idea of how our genetic relationship had arisen. I didn’t say anything about any specific relative or hers or mine, or that the relationship may well have been regarded as undesirable or shameful when it occurred. My letter gave both my snail-mail and email addresses and my phone number. It’s been a month, and no response. But my letter didn’t come back, so I have no reason to think she didn’t receive it. I won’t force myself on someone who doesn’t want to know me, for whatever reason. I think many people submit DNA samples only to learn about the components of their ethnicity, and not at all to be connected to “new” relatives. That is certainly their right, particularly in cases like the one I’ve described, and I will regretfully move on. Genealogy is endless, and there’s always new doors to open even when one is arbitrarily closed.

    • Barbara Hulsizer

      Tracking down someone’s private email address seems inappropriate to me. I had that happen once and it freaked me out. Felt like stalking and I reported them to Ancestry. Just my opinion, not meant as a criticism. Just an FYI on how it could feel to a recipient.

  22. Joyce

    Ancestry can you please update DNA more often? When testing a hypothetical line you attach DNA to that line…It seems like I’ve been waiting a month for new DNA suggestions re common ancestors to pop up. DNA results are still reading from the “real” tree he used to be attached to.

    Please also give us a way to report when your suggested ancestor hint in incorrect. I have a fellow who keeps popping up as a suggested ancestor and not only is it incorrect, it is impossible since my ancestor was born in England and the suggested ancestor was born in VA. We can help you weed out incorrect connections if we have a way to report when you are incorrect.

  23. Sandy

    I would like to see some kind of identification an adopted person can use on their DNA listing that shows they were adopted and would like help.

    If those adopted folkes that want help would also add any type of information they do have about where they were born, etc., and be willing to add family DNA match members to their DNA viewing lists, I’ll bet there would be many people willing to help them.

    So many people don’t have any idea that family members have been adopted out, or adopted in, for that matter, so they’re not looking for anyone.

    DNA filters such as “Adopted” and “Adopted and looking for help.” would be really nice to have, if they wish to use it. The reason I listed both is I’ve found some people don’t want help.

    Appreciate any consideration on this one.

      • Kim H

        We all have our opinions and thoughts and wishes….I feel the circles are more based on using the DNA along with the trees (the way we should all be using it) while thrulines is purely trees(and we know how that goes).

        • PF1993

          No, ThruLines is NOT just based on trees. It uses DNA and trees in a similar way as Circles, but also uses Private Searchable Trees and looks for the actual relationships between testers based on DNA and tree data. ThruLines is under the DNA tab on the homepage, so I’m not sure why you’d think it’s only using tree data and not DNA plus it shows you actual DNA matches and either a speculative (dotted) or confident (solid) line to a common ancestor based on the data available in various trees.

  24. jacqueline mollison

    My sister and I have found each other. She was adopted 80yrs.ago. Our Mom was24yrs.old, then I was born 20 yrs.later. Thanks to ancestry .com and my sister able to receive her birth certificate we are finally connected. I often heard and read about these unions but never thought it would happen to me. Thank you again Ancestry.com my sis and I are proof it works.

  25. Harold Germany

    I wish there was a filter that could be applied to the DNA Matches. I am more interested in 4th cousin matches or greater than I am in the 5-8th cousins.

  26. tony wilson

    HI Guys,
    a function which I would like to see is either a description of the segments (in centimorgans and location) of matches or even better a chromosome browser to see the matches visually.
    Cheers
    Tony

    • PF1993

      We would all love to see that. Ancestry has decided not to give it to us so far but I’m hoping they change their mind as it’s one of the main reasons people test at other services.

  27. Gary R

    When Ancestry came out with the Beta version of ThruLines, I decided to check it out and see if it would be useful to me. I found it to be extremely useful in located and documented over 50 third and fourth cousins. I go into “Your DNA Results Summary” menu option. A few weeks ago, I selected to use the beta version of this product. I click the page down once and then select the “Explore ThruLines” button. That takes me to a page that lists my Ancestors and Potential Ancestors. Each ancestor is in a frame that is either solid line or a dashed line. Right now, I am not that concerned with my potential ancestors. I am working through my three times great-grandparents level. I select a specific individual and click in that frame. That takes me to a new screen that presents a hierarchy of relatives descended from my ancestor. Everyone is in a frame with connecting lines. The frames are solid lines or dashed lines. I understand and have used the fact that these individuals are taken from either my tree or somebody else’s tree and are based on DNA evidence and information from the source tree. This is an extremely useful presentation. Formerly, I could click in a solid line frame and be taken to that individual in my tree, or I could click in a dashed line frame and, with some restrictions based upon public or private trees or living or dead status, I would be taking to the source tree which was used to populate the dashed frame. Last week this was as I have described. However, this weekend everybody on the page was enclosed dashed lines for a period. Later, the solid and dashed lines returned. I figured Ancestry was working on the program. Again however, when I click a frame on this page, it does not take me to either my tree or some other tree. I have used this capability with much success in identifying my cousins. I appreciate the fact that Ancestry has done an excellent job of presenting information in a way that is both useful and functional. Please let me know what the status is on the capability of clicking a frame and being taken to a tree. Thank you.

  28. Johanna

    We are interested in the DNA to see if we can connect to family cousins as now unknow.. Only frustration to me is, we had to create 3 tree accounts, but I have done all the work in 1 account already. I’d like to be ab out to add more than one family DNA in the same “tree” account. I created separate tree’s in my account cause I wanted to make them more managerable for me. But when we went to take the DNA tests, it required each one to have their own account. ;(

    • Suzanne McClendon

      If I understand correctly what you are saying, they could make you the manager if their DNA and then you could access them from your Ancestry account. I manage the DNA of several people, and have viewer access to several other accounts. If you have a question of how to do this, please message me. I will help all I can.

      • Suzanne McClendon

        Sorry for the typos. Old eyes, fat fingers, and tiny phone keyboards just don’t work well together!

  29. G-Whiz

    I miss the old ancestry where we could look at so much more for free. When I did my first DNA test, it was $59, now it has shot up to $99. That is so sad. You brag about having 15 million DNA customers so why keep raising prices so much and charging for things that should be free? I love the site and I have found family but to dig deeper and view documents, I must pay extra? Smh, why be so greedy?

  30. Paul

    Warning be careful! Ancestry will find ways to offer temporary “trial” offers and then bill you monthly. They stole $600 from us that way. When caught, and confronted the say “we are not in a position to refund your money”. Thief’s!

    • PF1993

      Paul, this is not true. Ancestry makes it clear that you are signing up for recurrent billing. You clearly don’t pay attention because you would’ve noticed that they state this VERY clearly OR you would have noticed a monthly deduction over the course of MANY months to get to $600 or TWO YEARS worth of annual deductions. Pay closer attention instead of falsely accusing a company of unscrupulous behavior.

    • PF1993

      Paul, this is not true. Ancestry makes it clear that you are signing up for recurrent billing. You clearly don’t pay attention because you would’ve noticed that they state this VERY clearly OR you would have noticed a monthly deduction over the course of MANY months to get to $600 or TWO YEARS worth of annual deductions. Pay closer attention instead of falsely accusing a company of unethical behavior.

      • caith

        Paul, I have never had a problem with Ancestry in this regard. In fact, if you cancel before your expiration, THEY WILL GIVE YOU A CANCELLATION NUMBER! And, they still let you use the subscription until the maturity date. If you do NOT follow their rules, the subscription will roll over, and they will charge you. I always cancel 2-3 days before maturity.

        Never a problem. Just a beef with their navigation in our dna accounts as I have indicated below.

  31. phillipe Collier

    I agree with an above comment I used to be excited by DNA matches but now I get far too many most only sharing 6 or 7 centimorgans and usually no family tree and when they do I never see names that mean anything to me. I think many matches they give are related long ago and beyond the timeframe of finding an ancestor thus are useless as matches. Wish they would give more meaningful matches.

    • PF1993

      Phillipe, you “wish they would give more meaningful matches”? How would you like them to do that if people close to you haven’t tested? Would you like them to track down your tree and seek out your relatives and force them to test? Or would you prefer they make up a false but close match so it feels more “meaningful” for you? Seriously, man?

  32. Kevin morgan

    Actually 23 and me is way more accurate than ancestry for people from germanic Background.Ancestry literaly unable to recognize Germanic ancestry and merge it to English ancestry.I really wish to finally fix that problem.

  33. Susan Aumauer

    We need a way to search by location. Not by person. Ideally, when we search a location a list of ancestors who lived in that city, county, or state would come up. This way, when we are traveling, we will know who we can do research on in that location. For example, I’m going to Versailles, Kentucky. Which of my ancestors have lived in Versailles? Those are the people I will be researching while I’m there. That’s what I need to know. I know many members of ancestry.com who also want this feature.

  34. caith

    Ancestry, you have not started a new blog after your July 1, 2019 roll-out. This should be important to you to be informed of some of the bugs associated with this.

    Please, please bring back the “Last dna match visited” which was in the top bar. This is the only way we can get back to our dna match which we have researched especially after we have: 1) used the search feature in our match’s tree to go upstream back in time to find a common ancestor, and 2) to toggle between whatever tree we have been taken to and our own tree to confirm we have found a common ancestor. After we have done this navigation there is no way to get back to our original match!!! We are often even thrown out of Ancestry altogether. The top bar “Last dna match visited” was sticky until we choose to let go of it.

    Dna navigation and research is NULL AND VOID unless you reinstate this feature.

    Thank you! Hope you are reading.

Comments are closed.