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 Wharariki Beach Walk.
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.
Wharariki Beach Walk
Valid Reviews
118 Valid Reviews
The Wharariki Beach Walk experience has a total of 118 valid reviews. There are no invalid reviews 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 118 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 80 |
|
68% |
| 9/10 | 21 |
|
18% |
| 8/10 | 11 |
|
9% |
| 7/10 | 5 |
|
4% |
| 6/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 5/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
94.75% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Wharariki Beach Walk valid reviews is 94.75% and is based on 118 valid reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here as a comparison to the weighted average.
Face-to-Face Reviews
98 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 118 valid reviews, the experience has 98 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 98 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 62 |
|
63% |
| 9/10 | 19 |
|
19% |
| 8/10 | 11 |
|
11% |
| 7/10 | 5 |
|
5% |
| 6/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 5/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
93.88% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Wharariki Beach Walk face-to-face reviews is 93.88% and is based on 98 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
96.38%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tz | 10/10 | 367 days | 100% |
| Nick | 9/10 | 2983 days | 3% |
| Mike Dw | 10/10 | 3040 days | 3% |
| Nicole Kasischke | 10/10 | 3046 days | 3% |
| Heather Flanders | 8/10 | 3265 days | 2% |
| Melanie and Pascal | 8/10 | 3292 days | 2% |
| Sebastian and Johanna | 9/10 | 3301 days | 2% |
| Tereza Bulova | 9/10 | 3320 days | 2% |
| Bernd Giermann | 8/10 | 3339 days | 2% |
| Magdalena | 7/10 | 3364 days | 2% |
| Kayla | 10/10 | 3383 days | 2% |
| Sean | 10/10 | 3383 days | 2% |
| Louis Nilsson | 10/10 | 3385 days | 2% |
| Lene Nilsson | 10/10 | 3385 days | 2% |
| Janina | 10/10 | 3390 days | 2% |
| Evelyn Rloeh | 7/10 | 3391 days | 2% |
| Gio Zy | 8/10 | 3394 days | 2% |
| Kirsty Smith | 10/10 | 3410 days | 2% |
| Huon | 8/10 | 3627 days | 2% |
| Ana Coulee | 9/10 | 3628 days | 2% |
| Cecile Santiaux | 10/10 | 3628 days | 2% |
| Molly Bogeberg | 9/10 | 3633 days | 2% |
| Jenna Kuittinen | 8/10 | 3634 days | 1% |
| Ben Keiser | 10/10 | 3635 days | 2% |
| Tom Teuber | 10/10 | 3637 days | 2% |
| Anika Danits | 10/10 | 3637 days | 2% |
| Valerie Bernardini | 10/10 | 3643 days | 2% |
| Dan Ramsl | 10/10 | 3648 days | 1% |
| Lauren Dinnage | 10/10 | 3654 days | 1% |
| Patrick Thumeyer | 10/10 | 3654 days | 1% |
| Max | 10/10 | 3655 days | 1% |
| John and Jan | 9/10 | 3656 days | 1% |
| Volker Stroenisch | 10/10 | 3660 days | 1% |
| Josh Symons | 10/10 | 3661 days | 1% |
| Emily Garside | 10/10 | 3662 days | 1% |
| Chandra Macraigne | 7/10 | 3662 days | 1% |
| Horitz | 10/10 | 3667 days | 1% |
| Dani | 10/10 | 3667 days | 1% |
| Lee Sandberg | 8/10 | 3672 days | 1% |
| Tina Rust | 10/10 | 3673 days | 1% |
| William Lendway | 9/10 | 3674 days | 1% |
| Sophie Kalnymsky | 10/10 | 3675 days | 1% |
| Xavier Bistodeau | 10/10 | 3679 days | 1% |
| Quinn McCusker | 10/10 | 3683 days | 1% |
| Maria and Grace | 6/10 | 3685 days | 1% |
| Maria Brauherr | 10/10 | 3686 days | 1% |
| Veronique Kaplan | 10/10 | 3687 days | 1% |
| Christine Schtenker | 10/10 | 3690 days | 1% |
| Kristyna Mokrackoua | 9/10 | 3692 days | 1% |
| Florian Mueller | 10/10 | 3694 days | 1% |
| Anna | 10/10 | 3694 days | 1% |
| Iris Kerbler | 10/10 | 3698 days | 1% |
| Livia and Dave | 10/10 | 3700 days | 1% |
| Elisabeth Grabner | 7/10 | 3701 days | 1% |
| Christian Reimund | 9/10 | 3703 days | 1% |
| Stefanie Giese | 10/10 | 3703 days | 1% |
| Kim and Leon | 10/10 | 3707 days | 1% |
| Matthew Hallowell | 10/10 | 3711 days | 1% |
| Justin Kechanski | 8/10 | 3729 days | 1% |
| Steffen and Johannes | 9/10 | 3733 days | 1% |
| Ixtaso Roncal | 10/10 | 3778 days | 1% |
| Naelan Le Borgue | 10/10 | 4010 days | 1% |
| Oliver Pester | 10/10 | 4020 days | 1% |
| Kristina M | 10/10 | 4048 days | 1% |
| Bes | 10/10 | 4053 days | 1% |
| Inge van Noorf | 10/10 | 4107 days | 1% |
| FlyingKiwiGirl | 10/10 | 4201 days | 0% |
| Caroline Jonsson | 10/10 | 4353 days | 0% |
| Jonny Ronnblom | 10/10 | 4353 days | 0% |
| Martin Buchta | 9/10 | 4385 days | 1% |
| Anne Haenchen | 9/10 | 4385 days | 1% |
| Markus | 10/10 | 4396 days | 1% |
| Cornelia Witte | 10/10 | 4396 days | 1% |
| Sarah | 10/10 | 4409 days | 1% |
| Mike Majnik | 10/10 | 4409 days | 1% |
| Pioter Jurkowski | 10/10 | 4444 days | 1% |
| Patrick | 8/10 | 4444 days | 1% |
| Emma | 7/10 | 4444 days | 1% |
| Christin Woelk | 10/10 | 4714 days | 1% |
| Patrick Stoeit | 10/10 | 4724 days | 1% |
| Pete Wilson | 10/10 | 4736 days | 1% |
| Yu-Ti Chu | 9/10 | 4741 days | 1% |
| Alice Berg | 10/10 | 4743 days | 1% |
| Camille Coombes | 9/10 | 4743 days | 1% |
| Jan | 10/10 | 4750 days | 1% |
| Frederic Birke | 10/10 | 4752 days | 1% |
| Glenn Surzur | 8/10 | 4752 days | 1% |
| Caderet | 10/10 | 4752 days | 1% |
| Jan & Jile | 10/10 | 4755 days | 1% |
| Lars Schulz | 10/10 | 4765 days | 1% |
| N smith | 10/10 | 4809 days | 1% |
| Michael Kretzschmar | 10/10 | 4826 days | 1% |
| Tanja Rudolf | 10/10 | 4828 days | 1% |
| Peter Adams | 9/10 | 5109 days | 1% |
| Martin Guillaume | 10/10 | 5111 days | 1% |
| Jeroen Bartos | 9/10 | 5128 days | 1% |
| Jon Winter | 9/10 | 5130 days | 1% |
| Roeland Driessen | 10/10 | 5175 days | 1% |
| Rachel_Flowers | 10/10 | 5206 days | 1% |
| Sid | 10/10 | 5236 days | 1% |
| Alibeare | 10/10 | 5267 days | 1% |
| Susannah Eduart | 10/10 | 5461 days | 1% |
| Ann-Katrine & Sille | 10/10 | 5479 days | 1% |
| Josef & Christine Evers | 9/10 | 5490 days | 1% |
| Petersen | 10/10 | 5502 days | 1% |
| Gerry Nichols | 10/10 | 5504 days | 1% |
| Helen T | 10/10 | 5815 days | 1% |
| Bob Lenihan | 10/10 | 5832 days | 1% |
| Radek Hoferek | 9/10 | 5870 days | 1% |
| Pam K | 10/10 | 5873 days | 1% |
| Sabine Locker | 10/10 | 5890 days | 1% |
| csziegler | 10/10 | 5920 days | 1% |
| Rankers Rocks | 10/10 | 5936 days | 1% |
| Tait Suridge | 8/10 | 5947 days | 1% |
| Becca1 | 9/10 | 6182 days | 1% |
| Barry Treve | 9/10 | 6187 days | 1% |
| AnjaChrist | 10/10 | 6198 days | 1% |
| qofd | 10/10 | 6881 days | 1% |
Adjustments
No Adjustment
Several adjustments to the weighted average may be added to improve relevancy and credibility. Wharariki Beach Walk does not meet the criteria for any of these adjustments to apply.
Balancing Adjustment
0.31% 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.
Final Ranking Score
97%
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.