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 Dive Tutukaka.
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.
Dive Tutukaka
Valid Reviews
87 Valid Reviews
The Dive Tutukaka experience has a total of 88 reviews. There are 87 valid reviews that are included when calculating the ranking score and 1 invalid review 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 87 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 39 |
|
45% |
| 9/10 | 28 |
|
32% |
| 8/10 | 15 |
|
17% |
| 7/10 | 2 |
|
2% |
| 6/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 5/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
90.80% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Dive Tutukaka valid reviews is 90.80% and is based on 87 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
72 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 87 valid reviews, the experience has 72 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 72 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 28 |
|
39% |
| 9/10 | 26 |
|
36% |
| 8/10 | 14 |
|
19% |
| 7/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 6/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 5/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
89.86% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Dive Tutukaka face-to-face reviews is 89.86% and is based on 72 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
91.12%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Barbara McNab | 10/10 | 2457 days | 100% |
| Cherie and Dan | 10/10 | 2797 days | 82% |
| Netta Tyler | 10/10 | 2850 days | 79% |
| Theerada Wongkaew | 10/10 | 2891 days | 76% |
| Gazmira Molina | 8/10 | 2934 days | 72% |
| Jessica Nasstrom | 8/10 | 2941 days | 72% |
| Adeline | 8/10 | 2946 days | 72% |
| Rebecca Pierce | 10/10 | 2973 days | 72% |
| Jane Simmons | 10/10 | 3095 days | 65% |
| Julia Clark | 9/10 | 3162 days | 61% |
| Kristina Breitwieser | 10/10 | 3167 days | 61% |
| Olivier Anciaux | 7/10 | 3180 days | 56% |
| Justine Hoffmann | 9/10 | 3212 days | 58% |
| Ruven Rintelmann | 9/10 | 3217 days | 58% |
| Niels Hoogendooen | 8/10 | 3230 days | 57% |
| Marie Brauherr | 10/10 | 3238 days | 58% |
| Luisa and Hannes | 8/10 | 3242 days | 56% |
| Christian Boudreau | 9/10 | 3260 days | 56% |
| Manuela Opprecht | 7/10 | 3592 days | 35% |
| Damaris Mayer | 3/10 | 3592 days | 19% |
| Sophie Huybrechts | 10/10 | 3634 days | 36% |
| Ally Cook | 9/10 | 3638 days | 35% |
| Jessie Sabine | 9/10 | 3937 days | 19% |
| Katrina Gamby | 10/10 | 4295 days | 0% |
| Sonia Sennane | 10/10 | 4649 days | 23% |
| Melanie Friessen | 9/10 | 4650 days | 23% |
| Barry Baily | 10/10 | 4661 days | 23% |
| Elisabeth | 9/10 | 4670 days | 23% |
| Lotte Foged | 8/10 | 4675 days | 23% |
| Anika | 8/10 | 4676 days | 23% |
| Paul | 8/10 | 4746 days | 23% |
| Elke & Charlotte | 9/10 | 4759 days | 23% |
| Kris Gijbels | 9/10 | 4992 days | 23% |
| Patrick Gloede | 10/10 | 4997 days | 23% |
| Norm and Sky | 9/10 | 5002 days | 23% |
| Roald and Ellen | 9/10 | 5003 days | 23% |
| B Kleven | 10/10 | 5008 days | 23% |
| Ann-Katrine & Sille | 10/10 | 5012 days | 23% |
| Erland Ostberg | 8/10 | 5016 days | 23% |
| Helene Descamps | 9/10 | 5030 days | 23% |
| Heather Deobald | 9/10 | 5032 days | 23% |
| Christina Fischer | 6/10 | 5037 days | 19% |
| Shoe | 10/10 | 5104 days | 23% |
| RobThexton | 10/10 | 5257 days | 23% |
| Martin | 9/10 | 5318 days | 23% |
| cpochin | 10/10 | 5348 days | 23% |
| John Casey | 10/10 | 5360 days | 23% |
| Peter Schmidt | 10/10 | 5379 days | 23% |
| Elisabeth Egerup | 10/10 | 5386 days | 23% |
| Vera Van Schie | 10/10 | 5387 days | 23% |
| Chris Glasg | 10/10 | 5387 days | 23% |
| Klass | 9/10 | 5393 days | 23% |
| Belinda Godhard | 9/10 | 5404 days | 23% |
| Theta | 9/10 | 5407 days | 23% |
| jamesg | 9/10 | 5467 days | 23% |
| Mille Winther | 10/10 | 5480 days | 23% |
| Christine Van Den Berg Michele Imbach | 10/10 | 5492 days | 23% |
| Eilahtan4 | 10/10 | 5530 days | 23% |
| NZDiver | 10/10 | 5591 days | 23% |
| Nikki Turner | 10/10 | 5634 days | 23% |
| Christine Dadd | 8/10 | 5701 days | 23% |
| KatieR | 10/10 | 5711 days | 23% |
| Michael Maddams | 9/10 | 5711 days | 23% |
| Russ C | 8/10 | 5713 days | 23% |
| danam | 10/10 | 5715 days | 23% |
| Katy1 | 9/10 | 5715 days | 23% |
| StefanieGermany | 9/10 | 5731 days | 23% |
| lannie | 9/10 | 5747 days | 23% |
| AbigailB | 10/10 | 5758 days | 23% |
| ReneeA | 10/10 | 5761 days | 23% |
| Ute | 9/10 | 5766 days | 23% |
| Annika | 10/10 | 5778 days | 23% |
| Salick | 9/10 | 5778 days | 23% |
| Thomas | 8/10 | 5785 days | 23% |
| Prentner | 10/10 | 5794 days | 23% |
| Evi | 9/10 | 5819 days | 23% |
| Limor | 8/10 | 5819 days | 23% |
| Christian | 10/10 | 5929 days | 23% |
| Lee Chapman | 10/10 | 6030 days | 23% |
| Jo and Tony | 10/10 | 6105 days | 23% |
| Lara Gema Conde | 5/10 | 6205 days | 17% |
| Trish | 10/10 | 6442 days | 23% |
| Fran | 8/10 | 6443 days | 23% |
| SueLinsk | 10/10 | 6443 days | 23% |
| Rosemary | 9/10 | 6443 days | 23% |
| Martin Christina | 9/10 | 6449 days | 23% |
| Meike | 8/10 | 6476 days | 23% |
Adjustments
Several adjustments to the weighted average are added to improve relevancy and credibility. These adjustments apply equally to all experiences that meet the criteria.
Sample Size Adjustment
No Adjustment
A reasonable number of reviews are necessary in order for the average to be credible and for an experience to take a prime position within the ranking tables. As such, experiences with only a few reviews have a moderated score. This does not mean that the experience or the reviews can't be trusted. The Dive Tutukaka experience has plenty of reviews and does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
Recent Reviews Adjustment
-4.05% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 43 days. However the Dive Tutukaka experience does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
In addition, an experience's ranking score may be adjusted for each day there is no new ranking. After 1 day the adjustment comes into effect. The maximum number of days that can be adjusted for is 200 days. Due to the seasonal nature of many businesses, this adjustment is applied dynamically throughout the year.
The Dive Tutukaka experience has been adjusted for 200 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 197 | -3.99% |
| 198 | -4.01% |
| 199 | -4.03% |
| 200 | -4.05% |
| 201 | -4.07% |
| 202 | -4.09% |
| 203 | -4.11% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
1.44% 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 customers 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
89%
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.