G'day, 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 Moeraki Boulders.
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.
100 Valid Reviews
The Moeraki Boulders experience has a total of 100 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 100 valid reviews:
Rating | Count | Percentage | |
---|---|---|---|
10/10 | 21 |
|
21% |
9/10 | 24 |
|
24% |
8/10 | 24 |
|
24% |
7/10 | 13 |
|
13% |
6/10 | 6 |
|
6% |
5/10 | 7 |
|
7% |
4/10 | 2 |
|
2% |
3/10 | 2 |
|
2% |
2/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
79.60% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Moeraki Boulders valid reviews is 79.60% and is based on 100 valid reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here as a comparison to the weighted average.
77 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 100 valid reviews, the experience has 77 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 77 face-to-face reviews:
Rating | Count | Percentage | |
---|---|---|---|
10/10 | 15 |
|
19% |
9/10 | 18 |
|
23% |
8/10 | 19 |
|
25% |
7/10 | 13 |
|
17% |
6/10 | 3 |
|
4% |
5/10 | 5 |
|
6% |
4/10 | 2 |
|
3% |
3/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
2/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
79.35% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Moeraki Boulders face-to-face reviews is 79.35% and is based on 77 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
76.07%
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 |
---|---|---|---|
Nina S. Larsen | 8/10 | 400 days | 100% |
Sarah | 6/10 | 857 days | 56% |
Mike Fricker | 10/10 | 2349 days | 4% |
Sebasitian | 7/10 | 2980 days | 3% |
Jerome Cluzel | 7/10 | 3000 days | 3% |
Franziska Liebe | 10/10 | 3017 days | 3% |
Sophie | 8/10 | 3027 days | 3% |
Maarten | 5/10 | 3029 days | 2% |
Jean Charlies Coudray | 8/10 | 3033 days | 3% |
Ulrich K | 5/10 | 3062 days | 2% |
Philippa Buchanan | 8/10 | 3164 days | 3% |
Nele Foerske | 8/10 | 3266 days | 2% |
Gavin Moffatt | 7/10 | 3269 days | 2% |
Benedikt Maus | 7/10 | 3277 days | 2% |
Laura Munguira Vadillo | 9/10 | 3279 days | 2% |
Alvaro Rodriguez | 10/10 | 3279 days | 2% |
Radim Halasz | 7/10 | 3288 days | 2% |
Katerina Vobecka | 8/10 | 3288 days | 2% |
Michael Menrath | 5/10 | 3291 days | 2% |
Liwen | 5/10 | 3296 days | 2% |
Laura Harmon | 4/10 | 3302 days | 2% |
Chris | 6/10 | 3311 days | 2% |
Sandrine | 5/10 | 3314 days | 2% |
Simon Striegel | 7/10 | 3330 days | 2% |
Sophia Zaenglo | 7/10 | 3330 days | 2% |
Brandon Patton | 10/10 | 3335 days | 2% |
Dan Wilson | 7/10 | 3369 days | 2% |
Nicole and Elliott | 8/10 | 3383 days | 2% |
Evie Sel | 7/10 | 3385 days | 2% |
Emma Rochester | 10/10 | 3428 days | 2% |
Annabelle deMontignie | 10/10 | 3506 days | 2% |
Dianne van der Wal | 6/10 | 3523 days | 2% |
James Webster | 9/10 | 3625 days | 2% |
Carmen | 8/10 | 3649 days | 2% |
Robin Sommer | 10/10 | 3685 days | 2% |
Isabelle | 9/10 | 3705 days | 1% |
Matthias Thorn | 5/10 | 3718 days | 1% |
Bjorn Privat | 9/10 | 3740 days | 1% |
Karen Garvin | 10/10 | 3994 days | 1% |
Martin Sajdok | 5/10 | 3995 days | 1% |
Laure Cops | 9/10 | 4008 days | 1% |
Julie Robinson | 8/10 | 4039 days | 1% |
Viola | 8/10 | 4051 days | 1% |
Terry Seaman | 9/10 | 4052 days | 1% |
Lena Jensen | 8/10 | 4059 days | 1% |
Jesper Andersen | 8/10 | 4059 days | 1% |
Jacqui Knight | 10/10 | 4066 days | 1% |
Nicolas Trezeguet | 9/10 | 4084 days | 1% |
Kim Maertens | 8/10 | 4093 days | 1% |
FlyingKiwiGirl | 10/10 | 4114 days | 1% |
Brian | 9/10 | 4144 days | 1% |
Stefan | 9/10 | 4374 days | 0% |
Bettina Fluhrer | 10/10 | 4374 days | 0% |
Hanneke P | 8/10 | 4448 days | 1% |
Loesje | 6/10 | 4479 days | 1% |
Auger | 9/10 | 4486 days | 1% |
Auger | 9/10 | 4486 days | 1% |
Sally Gordie | 10/10 | 4741 days | 1% |
Oliver Hardt | 8/10 | 4743 days | 1% |
Tinne Cis | 4/10 | 4751 days | 1% |
Indra t Jolle | 2/10 | 4758 days | 0% |
Karin Laurev | 7/10 | 4763 days | 1% |
Ed & Katie Riches | 6/10 | 4766 days | 1% |
Russell | 9/10 | 4768 days | 1% |
Tadej Ferjan | 9/10 | 4768 days | 1% |
Diane Moss | 8/10 | 4768 days | 1% |
John A Jerome | 9/10 | 4769 days | 1% |
Carel | 7/10 | 4780 days | 1% |
Kai | 10/10 | 4851 days | 1% |
Rebecca & Hugh Small | 9/10 | 4855 days | 1% |
cruisysue | 8/10 | 4967 days | 1% |
Phill2517 | 9/10 | 5059 days | 1% |
Marcus | 9/10 | 5079 days | 1% |
Andrew Newark | 8/10 | 5089 days | 1% |
Fasto Maserati | 7/10 | 5110 days | 1% |
Hendrik Behrens | 9/10 | 5114 days | 1% |
Lynda Hutchins | 8/10 | 5114 days | 1% |
Kai Eppink | 6/10 | 5118 days | 1% |
Marcus | 8/10 | 5125 days | 1% |
Manu & Gabi | 10/10 | 5125 days | 1% |
Marieke and Bert-Jan | 8/10 | 5136 days | 1% |
Jensen | 8/10 | 5145 days | 1% |
Jochen | 8/10 | 5146 days | 1% |
Doris Neuber | 10/10 | 5147 days | 1% |
Montys | 9/10 | 5271 days | 1% |
Bowness | 9/10 | 5472 days | 1% |
Main | 9/10 | 5486 days | 1% |
Krause | 10/10 | 5494 days | 1% |
Neal | 10/10 | 5498 days | 1% |
Wilbert Germ | 10/10 | 5498 days | 1% |
John Helle | 7/10 | 5506 days | 1% |
Mathias | 3/10 | 5513 days | 1% |
middendorp | 10/10 | 5559 days | 1% |
Anna | 10/10 | 5575 days | 1% |
Ann Riley | 8/10 | 5587 days | 1% |
Marcel Schleinkcfer | 9/10 | 5587 days | 1% |
Rose and Jess Damon and Esler | 10/10 | 5728 days | 1% |
JonK | 9/10 | 5807 days | 1% |
SophieC | 9/10 | 5814 days | 1% |
JanW | 3/10 | 5831 days | 1% |
No Adjustment
Several adjustments to the weighted average may be added to improve relevancy and credibility. Moeraki Boulders does not meet the criteria for any of these adjustments to apply.
4.25% 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.
80%
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.