Hey, thanks for your interest in how we calculate an experience's ranking score. It's at the core of Rankers so I'm pleased you're curious.
The ranking score percentage is used to compare and sort experiences in ranking tables. It is not necessarily a direct measurement of the quality of a particular experience as rated by its customers. I've found it a useful tool to allow me to find the best experiences with confidence. But I've also found it important to read the customer reviews before making any final judgements!
We calculate an experience's ranking score using a multi-factor data model instead of a raw data average (mean). This model takes into account several important questions. For instance - is there a trusted body of reviews? What is the age of a review and is the review from a credible source?
Below you'll find details around some of the important factors that went into calculating the ranking score for Rob Roy Track.
If you have any questions or comments about our ranking score calculation please get in touch at info@rankers.co.nz. We don't believe this is perfect or complete so we're always interested in ways we might make improvements.
131 Valid Reviews
The Rob Roy Track experience has a total of 132 reviews. There are 131 valid reviews that are included when calculating the ranking score and 1 invalid review that are excluded from the calculation. Reviews can be excluded only when a reviewer is not verified or after an investigation by our team determines the reviewer is not genuine.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 131 valid reviews:
Rating | Count | Percentage | |
---|---|---|---|
10/10 | 62 |
|
47% |
9/10 | 44 |
|
34% |
8/10 | 16 |
|
12% |
7/10 | 4 |
|
3% |
6/10 | 3 |
|
2% |
5/10 | 2 |
|
2% |
4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
91.60% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Rob Roy Track valid reviews is 91.60% and is based on 131 valid reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here as a comparison to the weighted average.
119 Face-to-Face Reviews
The Rankers team meets with travellers while they’re in New Zealand and conducts face-to-face surveys. These reviews, in our opinion, are the most trusted in the industry and represent a critical control sample. To our knowledge, we are the only travel review website in the world that has gone to this extent.
More about face-to-face reviews
Within the 131 valid reviews, the experience has 119 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 119 face-to-face reviews:
Rating | Count | Percentage | |
---|---|---|---|
10/10 | 55 |
|
46% |
9/10 | 39 |
|
33% |
8/10 | 16 |
|
13% |
7/10 | 4 |
|
3% |
6/10 | 3 |
|
3% |
5/10 | 2 |
|
2% |
4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
91.18% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Rob Roy Track face-to-face reviews is 91.18% and is based on 119 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
94.48%
Rankers calculates a weighted mean as a base average on which we can improve. Individual review's ratings are given a weight based on several factors. The weight of a review determines the overall impact it'll have on the final weighted average.
Recent reviews have more weight as they are more relevant and reflect the experience as it currently operates. Over time reviews become less relevant and loose their impact on the ranking score.
Low rating reviews carry slightly less weight. This dampens the effect of very low ratings for every experience across the board. This is especially important when the experience has few reviews overall and a single negative rating can grossly mischaracterise an experience. Consistent poor reviews will still result in the experience receiving a comparitively low ranking score.
Credible sources provide reviews that can be trusted. If we have verified a reviewer is genuine via a face-to-face meeting then the review carries additional weight.
Reviewer | Rating | Age | Relative Weight |
---|---|---|---|
DANIEL SAN | 10/10 | 809 days | 100% |
Sally Caboche | 10/10 | 2848 days | 5% |
Wolf | 10/10 | 2899 days | 5% |
Sylvie Meganck | 10/10 | 2899 days | 5% |
Ylva Teleman | 10/10 | 2905 days | 5% |
Sylvie Meganck | 10/10 | 2909 days | 5% |
Martin Marek | 10/10 | 2917 days | 5% |
Felicity Hughes | 9/10 | 2950 days | 4% |
Alex Hah | 10/10 | 2951 days | 4% |
James Macguire | 10/10 | 2951 days | 4% |
Nathalie | 10/10 | 2993 days | 4% |
Simon | 10/10 | 2993 days | 4% |
Janina | 9/10 | 3011 days | 4% |
Denis Schall | 10/10 | 3019 days | 4% |
Charlotte Molesworth | 9/10 | 3025 days | 4% |
Marc | 10/10 | 3026 days | 4% |
Kirsty Smith | 10/10 | 3031 days | 4% |
MARK CURPHEY | 10/10 | 3040 days | 4% |
Diego Casanova | 10/10 | 3040 days | 4% |
Cat Johnston | 10/10 | 3040 days | 4% |
James Jackson | 10/10 | 3041 days | 4% |
Maura O'Connell | 10/10 | 3045 days | 4% |
Steve Smith | 8/10 | 3247 days | 3% |
Huon | 8/10 | 3248 days | 3% |
Cecile | 9/10 | 3248 days | 3% |
Daniel Idiart | 10/10 | 3259 days | 3% |
Sarah Dial | 7/10 | 3260 days | 3% |
Milan Maiwald | 9/10 | 3261 days | 3% |
Gessica | 8/10 | 3263 days | 3% |
Szu-Yi Hsu | 7/10 | 3265 days | 3% |
Chao Lai | 9/10 | 3265 days | 3% |
Anika D | 9/10 | 3265 days | 3% |
Dominique | 6/10 | 3266 days | 3% |
Jiri Sojka | 10/10 | 3270 days | 3% |
Jana Formankoua | 9/10 | 3270 days | 3% |
Clotilde Graziani | 10/10 | 3272 days | 3% |
Johannes Eisel | 9/10 | 3272 days | 3% |
Sydney Lupton | 5/10 | 3277 days | 3% |
Joaquin Gruffat | 9/10 | 3281 days | 3% |
Lili Souris | 10/10 | 3284 days | 3% |
Elodie Bardolle | 8/10 | 3284 days | 3% |
Laurent Petit | 10/10 | 3299 days | 3% |
Sara and Antoine | 9/10 | 3329 days | 3% |
Hannah Stiles | 10/10 | 3329 days | 3% |
Monika Dippel | 10/10 | 3349 days | 3% |
Nicole and Elliott | 10/10 | 3365 days | 3% |
Elisabet Millet | 10/10 | 3370 days | 3% |
Graham Lighner | 10/10 | 3376 days | 3% |
Danica Vrsaljko | 10/10 | 3627 days | 2% |
Markus Johannes | 9/10 | 3627 days | 2% |
Kristina Farkas | 10/10 | 3656 days | 2% |
Finn and Melanie Lorbeer | 10/10 | 3662 days | 2% |
Barbara | 9/10 | 3714 days | 2% |
Samuel Tohko | 10/10 | 3714 days | 2% |
Shelly Weissbrem | 10/10 | 3731 days | 2% |
Julie | 9/10 | 3760 days | 2% |
Marilyn Nadeau | 9/10 | 3945 days | 1% |
Helen Olsson | 10/10 | 3982 days | 1% |
Max Backelandt | 9/10 | 3985 days | 1% |
Marie Toulemonde | 10/10 | 3985 days | 1% |
Chris Handley | 9/10 | 4002 days | 1% |
Charlotte Casey | 8/10 | 4002 days | 1% |
Igor | 9/10 | 4006 days | 1% |
Olivier Carval | 9/10 | 4008 days | 1% |
Francisco Pablo Miguel | 8/10 | 4031 days | 1% |
Gal Bero | 10/10 | 4068 days | 1% |
Daniel McAlpine | 10/10 | 4070 days | 1% |
Kellie | 10/10 | 4070 days | 1% |
Jitka Krejcova | 10/10 | 4357 days | 0% |
Michal Sturma | 10/10 | 4357 days | 0% |
Raelene Vine | 9/10 | 4371 days | 0% |
Petra Blumberg | 9/10 | 4377 days | 0% |
Guillot | 9/10 | 4378 days | 0% |
Fraser Goldsmith | 10/10 | 4395 days | 2% |
Jacquemard | 8/10 | 4466 days | 2% |
Karsten Meyer | 9/10 | 4476 days | 2% |
Loesje | 9/10 | 4491 days | 2% |
Rien | 8/10 | 4728 days | 2% |
Carole Carter | 10/10 | 4728 days | 2% |
Daniel Patricia | 8/10 | 4739 days | 2% |
Sam | 10/10 | 4740 days | 2% |
Les Barnes | 9/10 | 4745 days | 2% |
Karin Laurev | 10/10 | 4745 days | 2% |
Mike & Jennie | 9/10 | 4747 days | 2% |
Lyn Deavin | 6/10 | 4748 days | 1% |
Diane Moss | 7/10 | 4750 days | 1% |
Kurt & Noemi Buhler | 9/10 | 4760 days | 2% |
Frank & Julia | 9/10 | 4764 days | 2% |
budge69 | 10/10 | 4765 days | 2% |
Mike1952 | 9/10 | 4765 days | 2% |
Urban Reifler | 9/10 | 4776 days | 2% |
Kaelin | 10/10 | 4841 days | 2% |
Scott & Madeleine Bancroft | 10/10 | 4847 days | 2% |
Allison Meyoz | 8/10 | 5047 days | 2% |
Fontvieille | 5/10 | 5054 days | 1% |
Marc Edwards | 9/10 | 5060 days | 2% |
Ken Talan | 10/10 | 5067 days | 2% |
Laurent P | 10/10 | 5074 days | 2% |
Matthias Joos | 9/10 | 5091 days | 2% |
Ann-Kathrin Auditor | 10/10 | 5096 days | 2% |
Mannebach & Siejert | 8/10 | 5099 days | 2% |
Laurent Michon | 8/10 | 5100 days | 2% |
Brendan Dunn | 9/10 | 5102 days | 2% |
Carmel | 8/10 | 5106 days | 2% |
Sandra | 9/10 | 5107 days | 2% |
Nataly Loewidt | 10/10 | 5122 days | 2% |
Tom Hill | 8/10 | 5125 days | 2% |
Darrell & Michelle Lamb | 9/10 | 5384 days | 2% |
Ann Michle | 10/10 | 5387 days | 2% |
Inbar Yizhar Barnea | 9/10 | 5455 days | 2% |
David Morton | 9/10 | 5469 days | 2% |
Paula Martinez | 10/10 | 5470 days | 2% |
Chris el capitan | 10/10 | 5472 days | 2% |
Huber | 10/10 | 5489 days | 2% |
Dick Rosman | 9/10 | 5491 days | 2% |
Rob | 9/10 | 5493 days | 2% |
Jeremy & Sarah Rind | 6/10 | 5494 days | 1% |
S Luis Van Oler | 8/10 | 5500 days | 2% |
mariekef | 9/10 | 5541 days | 2% |
simonbo | 10/10 | 5541 days | 2% |
alasiac | 10/10 | 5557 days | 2% |
Katrin Wennin | 10/10 | 5568 days | 2% |
johanw | 9/10 | 5673 days | 2% |
linus | 9/10 | 5683 days | 2% |
AndreaT | 10/10 | 5797 days | 2% |
JasminA | 7/10 | 5801 days | 1% |
Philipp | 9/10 | 5801 days | 2% |
Enno Brehm | 9/10 | 5813 days | 2% |
HovingL | 10/10 | 5813 days | 2% |
Gillian | 8/10 | 5821 days | 2% |
kempt | 10/10 | 6166 days | 2% |
No Adjustment
Several adjustments to the weighted average may be added to improve relevancy and credibility. Rob Roy Track does not meet the criteria for any of these adjustments to apply.
0.48% Adjustment
Every experience's review score is adjusted to balance out the disproportional number of negative reviews that are contributed.
You won't be surprised to learn that disgruntled folk are more likely to leave a review than happy ones. They are motivated to share their experience and warn others. We consider this a good thing and it's why reading the reviews is important. However we've learned it can misrepresent the experience in a more overall sense.
We apply a balancing adjustment to counteract this effect and ensure the ranking score is a more fair representation of the experience. This adjustment is applied equally to all experiences.
95%
The final ranking score once any adjustments, ratings, and rounding has been applied. This value is recalculated each day and a short rolling average is applied. Therefore it may not be precisely accurate based on the other values presented.