Not sure why downvoted, this is correct. The rest of the world was populated by small (i.e. less genetically diverse) groups who came "out of Africa". So "Africans are more diverse genetically than the inhabitants of the rest of the world combined"

https://www.geneticsandsociety.org/article/study-africans-mo...

https://blogs.bcm.edu/2018/07/19/genetic-diversity-in-africa...

there are "Larger Genetic Differences Within Africans Than Between Africans and Eurasians" "and the genetic diversity in Eurasians is largely a subset of that in Africans, supporting the out of Africa model of human evolution"

https://www.genetics.org/content/161/1/269

The highest genetic diversity is actually among people who are small subgroups of "Africans" - Khoisan not Bantu.

https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms6692

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn24988-humanitys-forgo...

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25471224/

So, genetically, just as you can't draw a line around "bony fishes" without also including land animals who are also descendants of bony fishes.

https://www.sciencealert.com/actually-there-is-no-such-thing...

Also, you can't genetically call "Africans" a well-defined sub-group of humans, excluding others.