Hi, 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
96.39%
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 | 345 days | 100% |
| Nick | 9/10 | 2961 days | 3% |
| Mike Dw | 10/10 | 3018 days | 3% |
| Nicole Kasischke | 10/10 | 3024 days | 3% |
| Heather Flanders | 8/10 | 3243 days | 2% |
| Melanie and Pascal | 8/10 | 3270 days | 2% |
| Sebastian and Johanna | 9/10 | 3279 days | 2% |
| Tereza Bulova | 9/10 | 3298 days | 2% |
| Bernd Giermann | 8/10 | 3317 days | 2% |
| Magdalena | 7/10 | 3342 days | 2% |
| Kayla | 10/10 | 3361 days | 2% |
| Sean | 10/10 | 3361 days | 2% |
| Louis Nilsson | 10/10 | 3363 days | 2% |
| Lene Nilsson | 10/10 | 3363 days | 2% |
| Janina | 10/10 | 3368 days | 2% |
| Evelyn Rloeh | 7/10 | 3369 days | 2% |
| Gio Zy | 8/10 | 3372 days | 2% |
| Kirsty Smith | 10/10 | 3388 days | 2% |
| Huon | 8/10 | 3605 days | 2% |
| Ana Coulee | 9/10 | 3606 days | 2% |
| Cecile Santiaux | 10/10 | 3606 days | 2% |
| Molly Bogeberg | 9/10 | 3611 days | 2% |
| Jenna Kuittinen | 8/10 | 3612 days | 2% |
| Ben Keiser | 10/10 | 3613 days | 2% |
| Tom Teuber | 10/10 | 3615 days | 2% |
| Anika Danits | 10/10 | 3615 days | 2% |
| Valerie Bernardini | 10/10 | 3621 days | 2% |
| Dan Ramsl | 10/10 | 3626 days | 2% |
| Lauren Dinnage | 10/10 | 3632 days | 2% |
| Patrick Thumeyer | 10/10 | 3632 days | 2% |
| Max | 10/10 | 3633 days | 2% |
| John and Jan | 9/10 | 3634 days | 2% |
| Volker Stroenisch | 10/10 | 3638 days | 2% |
| Josh Symons | 10/10 | 3639 days | 2% |
| Emily Garside | 10/10 | 3640 days | 2% |
| Chandra Macraigne | 7/10 | 3640 days | 1% |
| Horitz | 10/10 | 3645 days | 2% |
| Dani | 10/10 | 3645 days | 2% |
| Lee Sandberg | 8/10 | 3650 days | 1% |
| Tina Rust | 10/10 | 3651 days | 2% |
| William Lendway | 9/10 | 3652 days | 2% |
| Sophie Kalnymsky | 10/10 | 3653 days | 2% |
| Xavier Bistodeau | 10/10 | 3657 days | 2% |
| Quinn McCusker | 10/10 | 3661 days | 1% |
| Maria and Grace | 6/10 | 3663 days | 1% |
| Maria Brauherr | 10/10 | 3664 days | 1% |
| Veronique Kaplan | 10/10 | 3665 days | 1% |
| Christine Schtenker | 10/10 | 3668 days | 1% |
| Kristyna Mokrackoua | 9/10 | 3670 days | 1% |
| Florian Mueller | 10/10 | 3672 days | 1% |
| Anna | 10/10 | 3672 days | 1% |
| Iris Kerbler | 10/10 | 3676 days | 1% |
| Livia and Dave | 10/10 | 3678 days | 1% |
| Elisabeth Grabner | 7/10 | 3679 days | 1% |
| Christian Reimund | 9/10 | 3681 days | 1% |
| Stefanie Giese | 10/10 | 3681 days | 1% |
| Kim and Leon | 10/10 | 3685 days | 1% |
| Matthew Hallowell | 10/10 | 3689 days | 1% |
| Justin Kechanski | 8/10 | 3707 days | 1% |
| Steffen and Johannes | 9/10 | 3711 days | 1% |
| Ixtaso Roncal | 10/10 | 3756 days | 1% |
| Naelan Le Borgue | 10/10 | 3988 days | 1% |
| Oliver Pester | 10/10 | 3997 days | 1% |
| Kristina M | 10/10 | 4025 days | 1% |
| Bes | 10/10 | 4031 days | 1% |
| Inge van Noorf | 10/10 | 4085 days | 1% |
| FlyingKiwiGirl | 10/10 | 4178 days | 0% |
| Caroline Jonsson | 10/10 | 4331 days | 0% |
| Jonny Ronnblom | 10/10 | 4331 days | 0% |
| Martin Buchta | 9/10 | 4363 days | 0% |
| Anne Haenchen | 9/10 | 4363 days | 0% |
| Markus | 10/10 | 4374 days | 0% |
| Cornelia Witte | 10/10 | 4374 days | 0% |
| Sarah | 10/10 | 4387 days | 1% |
| Mike Majnik | 10/10 | 4387 days | 1% |
| Pioter Jurkowski | 10/10 | 4422 days | 1% |
| Patrick | 8/10 | 4422 days | 1% |
| Emma | 7/10 | 4422 days | 1% |
| Christin Woelk | 10/10 | 4692 days | 1% |
| Patrick Stoeit | 10/10 | 4702 days | 1% |
| Pete Wilson | 10/10 | 4714 days | 1% |
| Yu-Ti Chu | 9/10 | 4719 days | 1% |
| Alice Berg | 10/10 | 4721 days | 1% |
| Camille Coombes | 9/10 | 4721 days | 1% |
| Jan | 10/10 | 4728 days | 1% |
| Frederic Birke | 10/10 | 4730 days | 1% |
| Glenn Surzur | 8/10 | 4730 days | 1% |
| Caderet | 10/10 | 4730 days | 1% |
| Jan & Jile | 10/10 | 4733 days | 1% |
| Lars Schulz | 10/10 | 4743 days | 1% |
| N smith | 10/10 | 4787 days | 1% |
| Michael Kretzschmar | 10/10 | 4804 days | 1% |
| Tanja Rudolf | 10/10 | 4806 days | 1% |
| Peter Adams | 9/10 | 5087 days | 1% |
| Martin Guillaume | 10/10 | 5089 days | 1% |
| Jeroen Bartos | 9/10 | 5106 days | 1% |
| Jon Winter | 9/10 | 5108 days | 1% |
| Roeland Driessen | 10/10 | 5153 days | 1% |
| Rachel_Flowers | 10/10 | 5184 days | 1% |
| Sid | 10/10 | 5214 days | 1% |
| Alibeare | 10/10 | 5245 days | 1% |
| Susannah Eduart | 10/10 | 5439 days | 1% |
| Ann-Katrine & Sille | 10/10 | 5457 days | 1% |
| Josef & Christine Evers | 9/10 | 5468 days | 1% |
| Petersen | 10/10 | 5480 days | 1% |
| Gerry Nichols | 10/10 | 5482 days | 1% |
| Helen T | 10/10 | 5793 days | 1% |
| Bob Lenihan | 10/10 | 5810 days | 1% |
| Radek Hoferek | 9/10 | 5848 days | 1% |
| Pam K | 10/10 | 5851 days | 1% |
| Sabine Locker | 10/10 | 5868 days | 1% |
| csziegler | 10/10 | 5898 days | 1% |
| Rankers Rocks | 10/10 | 5914 days | 1% |
| Tait Suridge | 8/10 | 5925 days | 1% |
| Becca1 | 9/10 | 6160 days | 1% |
| Barry Treve | 9/10 | 6165 days | 1% |
| AnjaChrist | 10/10 | 6176 days | 1% |
| qofd | 10/10 | 6859 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.