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 Te Anau Glowworm Caves.
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.
190 Valid Reviews
The Te Anau Glowworm Caves experience has a total of 191 reviews. There are 190 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 190 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 49 |
|
26% |
| 9/10 | 43 |
|
23% |
| 8/10 | 41 |
|
22% |
| 7/10 | 34 |
|
18% |
| 6/10 | 9 |
|
5% |
| 5/10 | 8 |
|
4% |
| 4/10 | 5 |
|
3% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
82.05% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Te Anau Glowworm Caves valid reviews is 82.05% and is based on 190 valid reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here as a comparison to the weighted average.
176 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 190 valid reviews, the experience has 176 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 176 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 45 |
|
26% |
| 9/10 | 39 |
|
22% |
| 8/10 | 38 |
|
22% |
| 7/10 | 34 |
|
19% |
| 6/10 | 8 |
|
5% |
| 5/10 | 8 |
|
5% |
| 4/10 | 3 |
|
2% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
82.10% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Te Anau Glowworm Caves face-to-face reviews is 82.10% and is based on 176 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
83.67%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dorothy and Graham Glen | 9/10 | 2965 days | 100% |
| Dan Coates | 9/10 | 3198 days | 83% |
| Dominik | 9/10 | 3198 days | 83% |
| Holloway | 10/10 | 3221 days | 82% |
| Christina | 6/10 | 3289 days | 67% |
| Barbara Knops | 9/10 | 3291 days | 77% |
| Manu Liberta | 10/10 | 3301 days | 77% |
| Bruno | 9/10 | 3311 days | 75% |
| Kirsty Smith | 10/10 | 3334 days | 74% |
| Sophia Satter | 8/10 | 3345 days | 72% |
| Afiya Levy | 10/10 | 3566 days | 57% |
| Johannes Eisel | 6/10 | 3575 days | 49% |
| Alexander Mattea | 5/10 | 3575 days | 43% |
| Timea Bagosi | 9/10 | 3577 days | 56% |
| Riviere | 8/10 | 3589 days | 55% |
| Dani | 8/10 | 3591 days | 55% |
| Benoit Leclerc | 7/10 | 3593 days | 52% |
| Anna Stoehr | 10/10 | 3611 days | 54% |
| Kai Krchmar | 6/10 | 3664 days | 43% |
| Kristina Farkas | 5/10 | 3959 days | 22% |
| Sophia Kadel | 10/10 | 3989 days | 27% |
| Laura and Marie | 7/10 | 3995 days | 24% |
| Rachel S | 10/10 | 4002 days | 26% |
| Joris Giullemot | 8/10 | 4311 days | 3% |
| Laura Metz | 7/10 | 4322 days | 2% |
| Hubertus Thost | 7/10 | 4322 days | 2% |
| Amanda | 4/10 | 4337 days | 0% |
| S B | 10/10 | 4350 days | 1% |
| M K | 10/10 | 4350 days | 1% |
| Maya Bakker-deDreu | 8/10 | 4358 days | 0% |
| Christin Woelk | 9/10 | 4638 days | 35% |
| Maria Klister | 7/10 | 4658 days | 33% |
| Lydia Kleinkoenen | 9/10 | 4678 days | 35% |
| Jessica Grewe | 9/10 | 4678 days | 35% |
| Hannah Lia-Isis Kubillus | 9/10 | 4678 days | 35% |
| Jan Zimmerman | 8/10 | 4689 days | 35% |
| Margaret and Derek McNeil | 10/10 | 4749 days | 35% |
| Frank and Suzanne | 8/10 | 4764 days | 35% |
| RollingMoon | 8/10 | 4825 days | 35% |
| Marcel & Kim Meichtry | 7/10 | 5045 days | 33% |
| Howell Davies | 5/10 | 5048 days | 27% |
| Baas | 7/10 | 5048 days | 33% |
| Pete & Pat Etheridge | 8/10 | 5048 days | 35% |
| Siegfried Richter | 7/10 | 5049 days | 33% |
| Melanie Mathiak | 10/10 | 5051 days | 35% |
| Sig Schrattner | 8/10 | 5051 days | 35% |
| Rebecca Doehl | 7/10 | 5052 days | 33% |
| Seth & Carla | 7/10 | 5053 days | 33% |
| Gabriele Wendt | 9/10 | 5053 days | 35% |
| Tadej Ferjan | 8/10 | 5053 days | 35% |
| Mary Mitchell | 10/10 | 5053 days | 35% |
| Emily Wikston | 9/10 | 5054 days | 35% |
| Andreas & Leonie Fehr | 10/10 | 5060 days | 35% |
| Horst Langstein | 9/10 | 5061 days | 35% |
| Marco Scheiber | 9/10 | 5062 days | 35% |
| Friedrich Kaltner | 10/10 | 5064 days | 35% |
| Frank & Julia | 10/10 | 5067 days | 35% |
| Thyg Lingdal | 10/10 | 5067 days | 35% |
| Nicole van Bergen | 8/10 | 5067 days | 35% |
| Mike & April Prince | 7/10 | 5081 days | 33% |
| Alfred & Henrike | 8/10 | 5093 days | 35% |
| Lyn Stainton | 6/10 | 5142 days | 30% |
| Ken Talan | 10/10 | 5370 days | 35% |
| Jon_and_Family | 9/10 | 5374 days | 35% |
| Gertz | 10/10 | 5378 days | 35% |
| Katarina Bokor | 8/10 | 5382 days | 35% |
| Mark Franklin | 6/10 | 5382 days | 30% |
| Gordon Agent | 10/10 | 5382 days | 35% |
| Maureen Hardy | 8/10 | 5382 days | 35% |
| AJ van Pelt | 8/10 | 5382 days | 35% |
| Werner and Rita | 9/10 | 5389 days | 35% |
| Richard Dudfield | 10/10 | 5391 days | 35% |
| Sayaka | 7/10 | 5391 days | 33% |
| Urs and Isabella | 7/10 | 5392 days | 33% |
| Juliane Kleiu | 10/10 | 5395 days | 35% |
| Linda Kremer | 9/10 | 5396 days | 35% |
| Rebecca Johnston | 9/10 | 5396 days | 35% |
| David Mellard | 10/10 | 5397 days | 35% |
| Bruce & Elaine Chote | 10/10 | 5397 days | 35% |
| Paul Nickson | 8/10 | 5397 days | 35% |
| Monique | 8/10 | 5397 days | 35% |
| Beat & Connie | 10/10 | 5399 days | 35% |
| Alex Stil | 9/10 | 5399 days | 35% |
| Pein van Nosrt | 7/10 | 5404 days | 33% |
| Raith | 9/10 | 5404 days | 35% |
| Elise van Haastert | 8/10 | 5404 days | 35% |
| Claudia | 10/10 | 5406 days | 35% |
| Carolin Ranner | 6/10 | 5406 days | 30% |
| Winskowsky | 9/10 | 5407 days | 35% |
| Hvid | 9/10 | 5421 days | 35% |
| Judith K. | 6/10 | 5423 days | 30% |
| Ruben and Jetske | 7/10 | 5423 days | 33% |
| Roy Seymour | 9/10 | 5424 days | 35% |
| Tom Hill | 10/10 | 5428 days | 35% |
| Ruua Reyrink | 7/10 | 5429 days | 33% |
| Patrick Hugener | 9/10 | 5429 days | 35% |
| JohnHaestad | 4/10 | 5433 days | 23% |
| dollimyxture | 10/10 | 5464 days | 35% |
| aggiemary04 | 10/10 | 5556 days | 35% |
| victoriauk | 4/10 | 5678 days | 23% |
| Baumgarten | 8/10 | 5706 days | 35% |
| travelbunnyadventures | 8/10 | 5709 days | 35% |
| Don & Geraldine | 10/10 | 5745 days | 35% |
| Matthias & Ceristiane | 8/10 | 5757 days | 35% |
| Hilary and Chris Ayton | 9/10 | 5758 days | 35% |
| Lis & Rob Tate | 9/10 | 5760 days | 35% |
| ccthornton100 | 10/10 | 5770 days | 35% |
| Bob Kusesia | 10/10 | 5771 days | 35% |
| Yssel de Schepper | 7/10 | 5776 days | 33% |
| Janny Meerdinnk Veldboow | 7/10 | 5776 days | 33% |
| Arie Ascher | 9/10 | 5777 days | 35% |
| Wolfgang Engelke | 10/10 | 5779 days | 35% |
| Thomas K | 9/10 | 5779 days | 35% |
| Loleit | 7/10 | 5791 days | 33% |
| Mattias Thorm | 9/10 | 5792 days | 35% |
| Vincente Garrido | 4/10 | 5793 days | 23% |
| R Gilge | 10/10 | 5794 days | 35% |
| Erik Hummelmose | 8/10 | 5794 days | 35% |
| Ian E | 6/10 | 5794 days | 30% |
| Nadine Schaee | 9/10 | 5795 days | 35% |
| Belinda Godhard | 2/10 | 5795 days | 15% |
| Uwe Rieper | 10/10 | 5797 days | 35% |
| E.M. Prideaux | 10/10 | 5812 days | 35% |
| Elizabeth E | 8/10 | 5814 days | 35% |
| Stevens Frans | 8/10 | 5815 days | 35% |
| Heinrich Hax | 9/10 | 5818 days | 35% |
| tanh | 7/10 | 5845 days | 33% |
| Stephanie Steiner | 8/10 | 5864 days | 35% |
| Julia May | 9/10 | 5871 days | 35% |
| X Neils | 7/10 | 5882 days | 33% |
| Sarah Smith | 5/10 | 5886 days | 27% |
| Anna | 6/10 | 5890 days | 30% |
| OliverG1 | 7/10 | 6092 days | 33% |
| Philipp | 5/10 | 6104 days | 27% |
| JasminA | 5/10 | 6104 days | 27% |
| ChristinaV | 8/10 | 6113 days | 35% |
| JuergenSchnitzer | 9/10 | 6120 days | 35% |
| AstridVG | 7/10 | 6120 days | 33% |
| NatasjaV | 7/10 | 6122 days | 33% |
| JimmyK | 7/10 | 6122 days | 33% |
| MarcoJ | 9/10 | 6124 days | 35% |
| LucyPoland | 9/10 | 6125 days | 35% |
| Stolz | 7/10 | 6127 days | 33% |
| BrzezinskaM | 10/10 | 6129 days | 35% |
| AndreB | 10/10 | 6129 days | 35% |
| Linda | 7/10 | 6135 days | 33% |
| Susan | 8/10 | 6136 days | 35% |
| Byleveld | 7/10 | 6137 days | 33% |
| JoseB | 8/10 | 6138 days | 35% |
| JetteG | 10/10 | 6138 days | 35% |
| CarolF | 7/10 | 6139 days | 33% |
| Rachel | 9/10 | 6153 days | 35% |
| Claire | 7/10 | 6153 days | 33% |
| Denise | 8/10 | 6154 days | 35% |
| Denk | 8/10 | 6166 days | 35% |
| Klalis | 10/10 | 6168 days | 35% |
| Thomas | 4/10 | 6172 days | 23% |
| Mike | 5/10 | 6173 days | 27% |
| Debbie Mossman | 9/10 | 6179 days | 35% |
| Johann | 10/10 | 6180 days | 35% |
| Carina | 10/10 | 6182 days | 35% |
| Mat | 8/10 | 6221 days | 35% |
| Anette | 7/10 | 6223 days | 33% |
| midlands_missus | 8/10 | 6226 days | 35% |
| David | 7/10 | 6281 days | 33% |
| Suyin | 10/10 | 6301 days | 35% |
| Franz | 10/10 | 6475 days | 35% |
| Jennifer Baulch | 7/10 | 6480 days | 33% |
| George Jeffs | 10/10 | 6483 days | 35% |
| Jacob | 9/10 | 6487 days | 35% |
| Aharon | 10/10 | 6502 days | 35% |
| D.A. Mulder | 8/10 | 6503 days | 35% |
| Knol | 8/10 | 6505 days | 35% |
| Cole Penelope | 8/10 | 6508 days | 35% |
| Jody | 7/10 | 6516 days | 33% |
| Anna | 5/10 | 6516 days | 27% |
| Pauline Thai | 8/10 | 6523 days | 35% |
| Dan Adamson | 8/10 | 6523 days | 35% |
| Stephen Brightman | 8/10 | 6532 days | 35% |
| Madeleine Rowland | 8/10 | 6532 days | 35% |
| Bronwyn Gaby | 9/10 | 6550 days | 35% |
| Free_ride | 9/10 | 6566 days | 35% |
| Michael | 9/10 | 6589 days | 35% |
| Raul | 10/10 | 6839 days | 35% |
| TeamFlorida | 9/10 | 6841 days | 35% |
| TeamFlorida | 8/10 | 6841 days | 35% |
| James | 9/10 | 6854 days | 35% |
| Rudi | 10/10 | 6858 days | 35% |
| Rolf Kruger | 10/10 | 6882 days | 35% |
| Brian | 10/10 | 6886 days | 35% |
Several adjustments to the weighted average are added to improve relevancy and credibility. These adjustments apply equally to all experiences that meet the criteria.
No Adjustment
A reasonable number of reviews are necessary in order for the average to be credible and for an experience to take a prime position within the ranking tables. As such, experiences with only a few reviews have a moderated score. This does not mean that the experience or the reviews can't be trusted. The Te Anau Glowworm Caves experience has plenty of reviews and does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
-4.05% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 42 days. However the Te Anau Glowworm Caves experience does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
In addition, an experience's ranking score may be adjusted for each day there is no new ranking. After 1 day the adjustment comes into effect. The maximum number of days that can be adjusted for is 200 days. Due to the seasonal nature of many businesses, this adjustment is applied dynamically throughout the year.
The Te Anau Glowworm Caves experience has been adjusted for 200 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 197 | -3.99% |
| 198 | -4.01% |
| 199 | -4.03% |
| 200 | -4.05% |
| 201 | -4.07% |
| 202 | -4.09% |
| 203 | -4.11% |
| … | … |
3.11% 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 customers 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.
83%
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.