Visual Basic was never "Low Code". It certainly was "RAD" ("Rapid Application Development"), but VB was always a heavier weight language than people thought it was.
There was a Visual Basic 7. The current compiler for "Visual Basic 2019" is version number 16.0 and the version numbers carry directly through. The VB team moved on, even if if so many of the users didn't. You can get pretty RAD with WinForms (or WPF) on .NET 5 with VB in Visual Studio right now today. It's not the same ActiveX mess of the 90s but that's a good thing in its own way.
Having done more than my share of coding in VB3-6, I can tell you that VB in any incarnation has never been "low code". If you think that WinForms or XAML in Visual Studio is any less RAD or somehow "more code" than the VB<=6 IDE, you are wearing some amazing nostalgia goggles and I wish I could believe in a world you seem to think existed.
No, that's what "RAD" means. "Low Code" means systems like Excel where "formulas" aren't exactly seen as "code" and nearly everything can be wired up visually. Power Apps and Power BI are "Low Code". Access and Excel are "Low Code". VB was never "Low Code", it was "RAD".
(And yes, today's WinForms and XAML editors in Visual Studio are quite "RAD", and exactly as "RAD" as VB <= 6 was, if not more so. VB.NET was never less "RAD" than VB <= 6 from the standpoint of visual tools. It just shifted component/plugin ecosystems and left an impression that it was less "rapid" to develop with because of sharp new learning curve, but the "rapid" never meant "no learning curves", it meant WYSIWYG designers, which VB.NET still had in spades.)
None of these terms have widely accepted precise definitions, but there are plenty of platforms considered "low-code" that still require quite a bit of traditional programming. Outsystems, for example.
Those that only offer formulas with no escape route to traditional programming, as you describe, are more commonly considered "no-code".
This distinction from wikipedia is pretty accurate:
"No-code platforms are accessible to any end-business user while low-code platforms require professional developers who can work within the platform's constraints."
There was a Visual Basic 7. The current compiler for "Visual Basic 2019" is version number 16.0 and the version numbers carry directly through. The VB team moved on, even if if so many of the users didn't. You can get pretty RAD with WinForms (or WPF) on .NET 5 with VB in Visual Studio right now today. It's not the same ActiveX mess of the 90s but that's a good thing in its own way.