AncestryDNA Ethnicity Update 2025: Lessons from My Cousins’ Results

 Why My AncestryDNA Ethnicity Results Are Less Helpful Than My Family’s

My AncestryDNA ethnicity results have always been the least helpful of anyone in my family. I believe it’s because I’m more ethnically mixed than most of my relatives. I have some less common ancestry from Burgenland and Nicaragua, along with more typical Western European roots.

I do think it’s interesting to see how accurate AncestryDNA’s regional breakdowns have become. I know my ancestry going back at least a couple hundred years, and so far, I haven’t found any non-paternity events. I’m sure if I traced the lines further back, I’d eventually run into a few, which is why I expect the ethnicity estimates to reflect more recent ancestry. If they reflect ancestry from farther back, it’s harder for me to confirm whether it's accurate or not since I don’t have the documentation to support it. This is especially true when it comes to Irish genealogy — I can only trace those lines back a couple hundred years with records.

For someone who’s adopted, these ethnicity estimates can provide real clues about their heritage. They can also be useful for the descendants of enslaved people. If the estimates continue to improve in accuracy over time, they may become even more valuable for people in those situations. Personally, I already have a good understanding of my ethnic background, so these results aren’t critical for me.

In my experience, looking at the family trees of close DNA matches actually gives a clearer picture of your ethnic origins. These matches can sometimes pinpoint your ancestors’ exact towns or villages. You can look for recurring place names among your matches to help narrow things down. AncestryDNA Journeys is another tool that can point you in the right direction. Journeys are actually more useful for recent ancestry.

Paternal First Cousins Comparisons

So, why are my first cousin’s DNA ethnicity results more helpful than mine?

His results pinpoint the exact area where our paternal great-grandmother, Helen Mullen Mason’s, recent ancestors came from. They were all from Connacht, Ireland — specifically around Pollaturick, Milltown, Tuam, Co. Galway — for several generations before her birth. Unfortunately, I haven’t been able to trace this branch of the family past 1800. Our Irish surnames include Mullen, McQualter, Huvane/Huane, and Rattigan. I do know that the Huvane/Huane name goes back quite far in the Kilvine area of Co. Mayo.

My paternal first cousin has 9% Connacht Irish ethnicity, which perfectly matches what we know about our great-grandmother Helen Mullen Mason’s background.

I have 2% ancestry from Connacht, along with a mix from other regions, and 9% from Leinster. That doesn’t seem to make sense. Perhaps I had ancestors from there further back in time, but since my cousins’ results are so different, I doubt it. We don’t share the exact same DNA segments, and even so, the Leinster percentage seems questionable. 

It appears some of my Leinster is from my mother's side, but the highest percentage is from my father's side. Ireland being a small island it's likely that I have ancestry that traces back to many areas in Ireland. The Leinster result isn't very useful if someone is looking for hints regarding more recent Irish ancestry. 

Here are the percentages for all 3 of my paternal first cousins who tested at AncestryDNA. All have a higher percentage of Connacht DNA. I have 2%. If I didn't know my ancestral origins already I might guess my Irish ancestors were recently from Leinster, Ireland. 

Why Does AncestryDNA Show Zero French or French Canadian DNA—Even Though We Have a French Canadian Great-Great-Grandfather?

One of the biggest surprises in our DNA results is that none of us show any French or French Canadian ethnicity on AncestryDNA, even though we know — without a doubt — that our great-great-grandfather was French Canadian. This isn’t a case of a misidentified ancestor or a non-paternity event. We've confirmed the connection through solid DNA matches on that line.

The first result in the row is my result, the second is my mother's. She has no French recent ancestry. The next three rows belong to my paternal first cousins. 

French Canada has been added to regions, specifically Quebec. None of my family members have this admixture. 

So, why is AncestryDNA missing this?

1. Ethnicity estimates are not exact

AncestryDNA ethnicity results are just that — estimates. They're based on comparing your DNA to reference panels of modern populations, and that means there’s always some margin of error or generalization. Labels like “French” or “Quebec” may not reflect exactly how your DNA is inherited across generations.

2. DNA inheritance is random

You inherit about 3.125% of your DNA from a single great-great-grandparent. Because of random recombination, it’s entirely possible that the small DNA segments you received from that French Canadian ancestor don’t contain markers that Ancestry identifies as French or Quebec-related. That doesn't mean the ancestry isn't real — it just didn't get passed down in a way that Ancestry’s algorithms detect.

3. Quebec is now a defined region — but you may not meet the threshold

AncestryDNA now includes a defined region for Quebec, which is a great improvement. However, not everyone with French Canadian ancestry will be assigned this region, especially if that ancestry comes from just one great-great-grandparent. The region tends to show up more clearly for people with multiple lines going back to Quebec, or more recent Quebecois ancestry. A single ancestor four generations back may simply not leave enough detectable DNA for Ancestry to flag the region.

4. French and French Canadian DNA overlaps with nearby populations

Genetically, French ancestry — especially from the early settlers of Quebec — often overlaps with populations in Belgium, Northern France, Western Germany, and even parts of the British Isles. French Canadian settlers came from various regions of France, many of which share DNA markers with other Western European populations, making it harder to isolate them as distinctly “French” in ethnicity reports.

5. Reference populations still have limitations

Even with the new Quebec region, Ancestry's ethnicity algorithm is only as good as its reference populations and sampling. While the database is growing, it may still lack the resolution to detect subtle French Canadian DNA in someone with limited recent ancestry from that region — especially if it's diluted over several generations.

---

So, while our great-great-grandfather was clearly French Canadian — and we have both the family records and DNA matches to support it — AncestryDNA’s ethnicity estimate doesn’t reflect that, and that’s not unusual. Ethnicity results can be interesting, but they’re only a rough sketch. For deeper insights, looking at shared matches, family trees, and regional migration histories usually tells a more accurate story.

The ethnicity results are much better than they were when these tests were first offered. They still aren't accurate enough to paint a complete picture of your ethnic roots.