I agree. What I mean, though, is Baptists would consider Anabaptists to be Baptists because of what they believe while Anabaptists would not consider Baptists Anabaptists because of what they do not believe.
But I am taking traditional positions. All of that has changed today. We have had Baptists baptizing infants, have elder rule, and we have had Anabaptists involved in politics, holding offices.
Traditionally Baptists hold to Baptists distinctives that Anabaptists share. But Anabaptist belief included things like a type of separation that socially isolates, a strict view of male and female conduct within a congregation, a strict view of non-violence, non-participation in politics, not holding office or voting.
Traditionally Anabaptist theology was not as influenced by the Reformation whereas Baptist doctrine benefitted from both Anabaptist doctrine and the foctrine of the Reformers (at least to a greater degree).
But today those boundaries are certainly less defined.