Unless I missed it, Full Genomes makes no comparison of costs in their paper. Apparently, FGC charges considerable more for their test than FTDNA charges for the Big Y test, something like twice as much! Wil *********************************** Yes, more than twice as much for those who ordered Big-Y during the introductory period. And value isn't determined by coverage alone--FTDNA may provide better tools for interpreting results and an easy-to-use matching system. At least that is what I would expect/hope to see. After I posted the link, Thomas Krahn mentioned another factor which could change the analysis. Lindsey Just for the record, I was not involved in that paper from FGC, but after reading it I have the impression that the analysis was done accurately according to the few information we have about BigY. This may change if FTDNA decides to run the BigY on the MiSeq machine without barcoding. The first results reported at the FTDNA conference were based on MiSeq runs without barcoding (one sample per run). The datasets that were found on a public FTP server were from a HiSeq instrument with barcoding where 9 and 12 samples were run simultaneously. Thomas Lindsey