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
96.46%
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 | 281 days | 100% |
| Nick | 9/10 | 2897 days | 3% |
| Mike Dw | 10/10 | 2954 days | 3% |
| Nicole Kasischke | 10/10 | 2960 days | 3% |
| Heather Flanders | 8/10 | 3179 days | 2% |
| Melanie and Pascal | 8/10 | 3206 days | 2% |
| Sebastian and Johanna | 9/10 | 3215 days | 2% |
| Tereza Bulova | 9/10 | 3234 days | 2% |
| Bernd Giermann | 8/10 | 3253 days | 2% |
| Magdalena | 7/10 | 3278 days | 2% |
| Kayla | 10/10 | 3297 days | 2% |
| Sean | 10/10 | 3297 days | 2% |
| Louis Nilsson | 10/10 | 3299 days | 2% |
| Lene Nilsson | 10/10 | 3299 days | 2% |
| Janina | 10/10 | 3304 days | 2% |
| Evelyn Rloeh | 7/10 | 3305 days | 2% |
| Gio Zy | 8/10 | 3308 days | 2% |
| Kirsty Smith | 10/10 | 3324 days | 2% |
| Huon | 8/10 | 3541 days | 2% |
| Ana Coulee | 9/10 | 3542 days | 2% |
| Cecile Santiaux | 10/10 | 3542 days | 2% |
| Molly Bogeberg | 9/10 | 3547 days | 2% |
| Jenna Kuittinen | 8/10 | 3548 days | 2% |
| Ben Keiser | 10/10 | 3549 days | 2% |
| Tom Teuber | 10/10 | 3551 days | 2% |
| Anika Danits | 10/10 | 3551 days | 2% |
| Valerie Bernardini | 10/10 | 3557 days | 2% |
| Dan Ramsl | 10/10 | 3562 days | 2% |
| Lauren Dinnage | 10/10 | 3568 days | 2% |
| Patrick Thumeyer | 10/10 | 3568 days | 2% |
| Max | 10/10 | 3569 days | 2% |
| John and Jan | 9/10 | 3570 days | 2% |
| Volker Stroenisch | 10/10 | 3574 days | 2% |
| Josh Symons | 10/10 | 3575 days | 2% |
| Emily Garside | 10/10 | 3576 days | 2% |
| Chandra Macraigne | 7/10 | 3576 days | 1% |
| Horitz | 10/10 | 3581 days | 2% |
| Dani | 10/10 | 3581 days | 2% |
| Lee Sandberg | 8/10 | 3586 days | 2% |
| Tina Rust | 10/10 | 3587 days | 2% |
| William Lendway | 9/10 | 3588 days | 2% |
| Sophie Kalnymsky | 10/10 | 3589 days | 2% |
| Xavier Bistodeau | 10/10 | 3593 days | 2% |
| Quinn McCusker | 10/10 | 3597 days | 2% |
| Maria and Grace | 6/10 | 3599 days | 1% |
| Maria Brauherr | 10/10 | 3600 days | 2% |
| Veronique Kaplan | 10/10 | 3601 days | 2% |
| Christine Schtenker | 10/10 | 3604 days | 2% |
| Kristyna Mokrackoua | 9/10 | 3606 days | 2% |
| Florian Mueller | 10/10 | 3608 days | 2% |
| Anna | 10/10 | 3608 days | 2% |
| Iris Kerbler | 10/10 | 3612 days | 2% |
| Livia and Dave | 10/10 | 3614 days | 2% |
| Elisabeth Grabner | 7/10 | 3615 days | 1% |
| Christian Reimund | 9/10 | 3617 days | 2% |
| Stefanie Giese | 10/10 | 3617 days | 2% |
| Kim and Leon | 10/10 | 3621 days | 2% |
| Matthew Hallowell | 10/10 | 3625 days | 2% |
| Justin Kechanski | 8/10 | 3643 days | 1% |
| Steffen and Johannes | 9/10 | 3647 days | 1% |
| Ixtaso Roncal | 10/10 | 3692 days | 1% |
| Naelan Le Borgue | 10/10 | 3924 days | 1% |
| Oliver Pester | 10/10 | 3934 days | 1% |
| Kristina M | 10/10 | 3962 days | 1% |
| Bes | 10/10 | 3967 days | 1% |
| Inge van Noorf | 10/10 | 4021 days | 1% |
| FlyingKiwiGirl | 10/10 | 4115 days | 1% |
| Caroline Jonsson | 10/10 | 4267 days | 0% |
| Jonny Ronnblom | 10/10 | 4267 days | 0% |
| Martin Buchta | 9/10 | 4299 days | 0% |
| Anne Haenchen | 9/10 | 4299 days | 0% |
| Markus | 10/10 | 4310 days | 0% |
| Cornelia Witte | 10/10 | 4310 days | 0% |
| Sarah | 10/10 | 4323 days | 0% |
| Mike Majnik | 10/10 | 4323 days | 0% |
| Pioter Jurkowski | 10/10 | 4358 days | 0% |
| Patrick | 8/10 | 4358 days | 0% |
| Emma | 7/10 | 4358 days | 0% |
| Christin Woelk | 10/10 | 4628 days | 1% |
| Patrick Stoeit | 10/10 | 4638 days | 1% |
| Pete Wilson | 10/10 | 4650 days | 1% |
| Yu-Ti Chu | 9/10 | 4655 days | 1% |
| Alice Berg | 10/10 | 4657 days | 1% |
| Camille Coombes | 9/10 | 4657 days | 1% |
| Jan | 10/10 | 4664 days | 1% |
| Frederic Birke | 10/10 | 4666 days | 1% |
| Glenn Surzur | 8/10 | 4666 days | 1% |
| Caderet | 10/10 | 4666 days | 1% |
| Jan & Jile | 10/10 | 4669 days | 1% |
| Lars Schulz | 10/10 | 4679 days | 1% |
| N smith | 10/10 | 4723 days | 1% |
| Michael Kretzschmar | 10/10 | 4740 days | 1% |
| Tanja Rudolf | 10/10 | 4742 days | 1% |
| Peter Adams | 9/10 | 5023 days | 1% |
| Martin Guillaume | 10/10 | 5025 days | 1% |
| Jeroen Bartos | 9/10 | 5042 days | 1% |
| Jon Winter | 9/10 | 5044 days | 1% |
| Roeland Driessen | 10/10 | 5089 days | 1% |
| Rachel_Flowers | 10/10 | 5120 days | 1% |
| Sid | 10/10 | 5150 days | 1% |
| Alibeare | 10/10 | 5181 days | 1% |
| Susannah Eduart | 10/10 | 5375 days | 1% |
| Ann-Katrine & Sille | 10/10 | 5393 days | 1% |
| Josef & Christine Evers | 9/10 | 5404 days | 1% |
| Petersen | 10/10 | 5416 days | 1% |
| Gerry Nichols | 10/10 | 5418 days | 1% |
| Helen T | 10/10 | 5729 days | 1% |
| Bob Lenihan | 10/10 | 5746 days | 1% |
| Radek Hoferek | 9/10 | 5784 days | 1% |
| Pam K | 10/10 | 5787 days | 1% |
| Sabine Locker | 10/10 | 5804 days | 1% |
| csziegler | 10/10 | 5834 days | 1% |
| Rankers Rocks | 10/10 | 5850 days | 1% |
| Tait Suridge | 8/10 | 5861 days | 1% |
| Becca1 | 9/10 | 6096 days | 1% |
| Barry Treve | 9/10 | 6101 days | 1% |
| AnjaChrist | 10/10 | 6112 days | 1% |
| qofd | 10/10 | 6795 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.