How much you feel 5E has from other editions will be largely based around what it is you find most important when playing D&D. And whether the previous edition you are referencing was also matching that importance or was completely counter to it.
If you are hugely into "Rulings, Not Rules"... you would probably say there's a lot of 2E in 5E (where that was a big part of 2E), and that there's not as much 3E in the game (since 3E was greatly into making actual rules for everything that the DM could look up.)
But if you look at say the mechanics behind rising ACs, saving throws that focus on Dex, Con, and Wis, having feats that allow you to customize your character, similar spell slot charts... you would say that 5E was a direct evolution out of 3E.
And likewise there are 4E things that feed directly into 5E that would make some people say one was an evolution of the other there too. More of a concern with game balance and character balance within a party for one.
So there's no right or wrong here. It's all a matter of perspective and what you as an individual find to be the "real focus" of Dungeons & Dragons, and which editions highlighted it compared to how 5E does it. And of course someone else who finds your main focus to be barely a blip as to why they play will not see the similarities in the same way.
