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
96.47%
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 | 290 days | 100% |
| Nick | 9/10 | 2906 days | 3% |
| Mike Dw | 10/10 | 2963 days | 3% |
| Nicole Kasischke | 10/10 | 2969 days | 3% |
| Heather Flanders | 8/10 | 3188 days | 2% |
| Melanie and Pascal | 8/10 | 3215 days | 2% |
| Sebastian and Johanna | 9/10 | 3224 days | 2% |
| Tereza Bulova | 9/10 | 3243 days | 2% |
| Bernd Giermann | 8/10 | 3262 days | 2% |
| Magdalena | 7/10 | 3287 days | 2% |
| Kayla | 10/10 | 3306 days | 2% |
| Sean | 10/10 | 3306 days | 2% |
| Louis Nilsson | 10/10 | 3308 days | 2% |
| Lene Nilsson | 10/10 | 3308 days | 2% |
| Janina | 10/10 | 3313 days | 2% |
| Evelyn Rloeh | 7/10 | 3314 days | 2% |
| Gio Zy | 8/10 | 3317 days | 2% |
| Kirsty Smith | 10/10 | 3333 days | 2% |
| Huon | 8/10 | 3550 days | 2% |
| Ana Coulee | 9/10 | 3551 days | 2% |
| Cecile Santiaux | 10/10 | 3551 days | 2% |
| Molly Bogeberg | 9/10 | 3556 days | 2% |
| Jenna Kuittinen | 8/10 | 3557 days | 2% |
| Ben Keiser | 10/10 | 3558 days | 2% |
| Tom Teuber | 10/10 | 3560 days | 2% |
| Anika Danits | 10/10 | 3560 days | 2% |
| Valerie Bernardini | 10/10 | 3566 days | 2% |
| Dan Ramsl | 10/10 | 3571 days | 2% |
| Lauren Dinnage | 10/10 | 3577 days | 2% |
| Patrick Thumeyer | 10/10 | 3577 days | 2% |
| Max | 10/10 | 3578 days | 2% |
| John and Jan | 9/10 | 3579 days | 2% |
| Volker Stroenisch | 10/10 | 3583 days | 2% |
| Josh Symons | 10/10 | 3584 days | 2% |
| Emily Garside | 10/10 | 3585 days | 2% |
| Chandra Macraigne | 7/10 | 3585 days | 1% |
| Horitz | 10/10 | 3590 days | 2% |
| Dani | 10/10 | 3590 days | 2% |
| Lee Sandberg | 8/10 | 3595 days | 2% |
| Tina Rust | 10/10 | 3596 days | 2% |
| William Lendway | 9/10 | 3597 days | 2% |
| Sophie Kalnymsky | 10/10 | 3598 days | 2% |
| Xavier Bistodeau | 10/10 | 3602 days | 2% |
| Quinn McCusker | 10/10 | 3606 days | 2% |
| Maria and Grace | 6/10 | 3608 days | 1% |
| Maria Brauherr | 10/10 | 3609 days | 2% |
| Veronique Kaplan | 10/10 | 3610 days | 2% |
| Christine Schtenker | 10/10 | 3613 days | 2% |
| Kristyna Mokrackoua | 9/10 | 3615 days | 2% |
| Florian Mueller | 10/10 | 3617 days | 2% |
| Anna | 10/10 | 3617 days | 2% |
| Iris Kerbler | 10/10 | 3621 days | 2% |
| Livia and Dave | 10/10 | 3623 days | 2% |
| Elisabeth Grabner | 7/10 | 3624 days | 1% |
| Christian Reimund | 9/10 | 3626 days | 2% |
| Stefanie Giese | 10/10 | 3626 days | 2% |
| Kim and Leon | 10/10 | 3630 days | 2% |
| Matthew Hallowell | 10/10 | 3634 days | 2% |
| Justin Kechanski | 8/10 | 3652 days | 1% |
| Steffen and Johannes | 9/10 | 3656 days | 1% |
| Ixtaso Roncal | 10/10 | 3701 days | 1% |
| Naelan Le Borgue | 10/10 | 3933 days | 1% |
| Oliver Pester | 10/10 | 3943 days | 1% |
| Kristina M | 10/10 | 3971 days | 1% |
| Bes | 10/10 | 3976 days | 1% |
| Inge van Noorf | 10/10 | 4030 days | 1% |
| FlyingKiwiGirl | 10/10 | 4124 days | 1% |
| Caroline Jonsson | 10/10 | 4276 days | 0% |
| Jonny Ronnblom | 10/10 | 4276 days | 0% |
| Martin Buchta | 9/10 | 4308 days | 0% |
| Anne Haenchen | 9/10 | 4308 days | 0% |
| Markus | 10/10 | 4319 days | 0% |
| Cornelia Witte | 10/10 | 4319 days | 0% |
| Sarah | 10/10 | 4332 days | 0% |
| Mike Majnik | 10/10 | 4332 days | 0% |
| Pioter Jurkowski | 10/10 | 4367 days | 0% |
| Patrick | 8/10 | 4367 days | 0% |
| Emma | 7/10 | 4367 days | 0% |
| Christin Woelk | 10/10 | 4637 days | 1% |
| Patrick Stoeit | 10/10 | 4647 days | 1% |
| Pete Wilson | 10/10 | 4659 days | 1% |
| Yu-Ti Chu | 9/10 | 4664 days | 1% |
| Alice Berg | 10/10 | 4666 days | 1% |
| Camille Coombes | 9/10 | 4666 days | 1% |
| Jan | 10/10 | 4673 days | 1% |
| Frederic Birke | 10/10 | 4675 days | 1% |
| Glenn Surzur | 8/10 | 4675 days | 1% |
| Caderet | 10/10 | 4675 days | 1% |
| Jan & Jile | 10/10 | 4678 days | 1% |
| Lars Schulz | 10/10 | 4688 days | 1% |
| N smith | 10/10 | 4732 days | 1% |
| Michael Kretzschmar | 10/10 | 4749 days | 1% |
| Tanja Rudolf | 10/10 | 4751 days | 1% |
| Peter Adams | 9/10 | 5032 days | 1% |
| Martin Guillaume | 10/10 | 5034 days | 1% |
| Jeroen Bartos | 9/10 | 5051 days | 1% |
| Jon Winter | 9/10 | 5053 days | 1% |
| Roeland Driessen | 10/10 | 5098 days | 1% |
| Rachel_Flowers | 10/10 | 5129 days | 1% |
| Sid | 10/10 | 5159 days | 1% |
| Alibeare | 10/10 | 5190 days | 1% |
| Susannah Eduart | 10/10 | 5384 days | 1% |
| Ann-Katrine & Sille | 10/10 | 5402 days | 1% |
| Josef & Christine Evers | 9/10 | 5413 days | 1% |
| Petersen | 10/10 | 5425 days | 1% |
| Gerry Nichols | 10/10 | 5427 days | 1% |
| Helen T | 10/10 | 5738 days | 1% |
| Bob Lenihan | 10/10 | 5755 days | 1% |
| Radek Hoferek | 9/10 | 5793 days | 1% |
| Pam K | 10/10 | 5796 days | 1% |
| Sabine Locker | 10/10 | 5813 days | 1% |
| csziegler | 10/10 | 5843 days | 1% |
| Rankers Rocks | 10/10 | 5859 days | 1% |
| Tait Suridge | 8/10 | 5870 days | 1% |
| Becca1 | 9/10 | 6105 days | 1% |
| Barry Treve | 9/10 | 6110 days | 1% |
| AnjaChrist | 10/10 | 6121 days | 1% |
| qofd | 10/10 | 6804 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
0.30% 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.