Living DNA still shows the most results, despite having the least SNPs of all the raw data versions I have. While my Superkit in Ancestry format, has the most, and only shows a modest amount of results. Perhaps because the amount of SNPs being used fills out more information, and more correctly shows what my actual results should be with this calculator? I don't think more results on the map necessarily indicate that it is more accurate. Idk But I do know more SNPs should yield more information. It is either the other ones a false matches being assigned to various samples, that is fleshed out more with more SNPs. Many of samples I get were all influenced and overlap with the Anatolian copper-age, so I can see how it (or any calculator really) could mistakenly assign those samples. Or the format in Living DNA just works better this calculator.
Ancestry by itself shows more results on the map, but the Superkit, in the same format shows slightly less. So perhaps that now that it has more SNPs to go by, it more correctly assigns the samples. Nevertheless, in 23andme format, it shows nothing, so format of the raw data is definitely a factor.
Oddly, my brother, and mother's 23andme raw data show about as much on their map, as my Living DNA kit does. They're using the same version as me.