I am not ready to make any large-scale comparisons yet, because so many things must be checked and ensured before it, but just for an excerise two qpAdm analyses.
1. Yamnaya samples seem to be an admixture of Samara-HG and Iranians with smaller additions of Karelian and Scandinavian hunter-gatherer admixtures. I got several possible results showing chisq below 1 (0.5-0.7). Main proportions were EHG (Eastern hunter-gatherers) and Iranian, although some Armenian was also possible. Indeed, this may follow the idea of ancient Iranian linguistic connection with some East European people.
2. I also checked Ashkenazi samples more precisely and found them being genetically very close Sicilians, but I was still able to find out a better composition by combining Early European Neolithic Farmers, Lebanese and Turkish samples. Chisq was typically around 1 or less. It also was observable that although Ashkenazim and many Southeastern Europeans showed clear Turkish like admixture it likely is not from present-day Turks (with exception of some Greeks and many Cypriots) because no Asian admixture was detctable and as far as I know Turks have some Asian admixture. So this was a bit puzzling. No Asian, but minor North African admixture existed in some Mediterranean results.