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 Swim with the Dolphins.
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.
Swim with the Dolphins
Valid Reviews
91 Valid Reviews
The Swim with the Dolphins experience has a total of 93 reviews. There are 91 valid reviews that are included when calculating the ranking score and 2 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 91 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 15 |
|
16% |
| 9/10 | 26 |
|
29% |
| 8/10 | 25 |
|
27% |
| 7/10 | 12 |
|
13% |
| 6/10 | 4 |
|
4% |
| 5/10 | 2 |
|
2% |
| 4/10 | 4 |
|
4% |
| 3/10 | 3 |
|
3% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
79.89% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Swim with the Dolphins valid reviews is 79.89% and is based on 91 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
80 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 91 valid reviews, the experience has 80 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 80 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 12 |
|
15% |
| 9/10 | 25 |
|
31% |
| 8/10 | 24 |
|
30% |
| 7/10 | 10 |
|
13% |
| 6/10 | 3 |
|
4% |
| 5/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 4/10 | 4 |
|
5% |
| 3/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
81.13% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Swim with the Dolphins face-to-face reviews is 81.13% and is based on 80 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
81.13%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nadja Guiliani | 4/10 | 3270 days | 56% |
| Ben Blackwell | 8/10 | 3284 days | 100% |
| mathieu boustie | 5/10 | 3381 days | 61% |
| Mattias | 7/10 | 3992 days | 10% |
| Arnaud Memay | 7/10 | 4073 days | 1% |
| Susser | 8/10 | 4073 days | 3% |
| Samuel Fritscher | 9/10 | 4381 days | 29% |
| Fabian and Teresa | 10/10 | 4407 days | 29% |
| Joroen Borkert | 7/10 | 4463 days | 25% |
| Faassen | 8/10 | 4484 days | 28% |
| Ben Simons | 9/10 | 4747 days | 29% |
| Martin Beuker | 4/10 | 4757 days | 7% |
| Romla | 8/10 | 4758 days | 28% |
| Marie Dutron | 8/10 | 4761 days | 28% |
| Preben vil Helmsen | 10/10 | 4763 days | 29% |
| Rick & Suus | 8/10 | 4764 days | 28% |
| Nora | 9/10 | 4764 days | 29% |
| Barry Baily | 9/10 | 4764 days | 29% |
| Christiane & Dirk | 8/10 | 4765 days | 28% |
| Scott Simpson | 5/10 | 4768 days | 14% |
| Wolfgang Beute | 8/10 | 4768 days | 28% |
| batzi | 3/10 | 4872 days | 0% |
| bow | 3/10 | 5025 days | 0% |
| Nick van de Belt | 9/10 | 5094 days | 29% |
| Patrick Gloede | 9/10 | 5100 days | 29% |
| Stoop | 9/10 | 5103 days | 29% |
| Siegfried Tuiel | 10/10 | 5106 days | 29% |
| Laura Leigh | 6/10 | 5110 days | 20% |
| John Taylor | 7/10 | 5116 days | 25% |
| Jon_and_Family | 7/10 | 5117 days | 25% |
| Marjan Van Den Braak | 4/10 | 5118 days | 7% |
| Wouter Teensma | 8/10 | 5121 days | 28% |
| Ann Parry | 10/10 | 5121 days | 29% |
| Rob | 8/10 | 5132 days | 28% |
| Alan & Gill Geach | 7/10 | 5139 days | 25% |
| Sarah Ewing | 9/10 | 5142 days | 29% |
| John N | 8/10 | 5476 days | 28% |
| Elisabeth Egerup | 10/10 | 5489 days | 29% |
| Wielink | 8/10 | 5490 days | 28% |
| Pierre Pilon | 9/10 | 5490 days | 29% |
| Pascal Auber | 8/10 | 5496 days | 28% |
| Lamb | 9/10 | 5509 days | 29% |
| Tonny | 8/10 | 5509 days | 28% |
| Dawn Campbell | 10/10 | 5541 days | 29% |
| guichard | 7/10 | 5561 days | 25% |
| HairyHaggis | 10/10 | 5572 days | 29% |
| katepat | 10/10 | 5572 days | 29% |
| Colin S | 10/10 | 5580 days | 29% |
| Ulyate | 6/10 | 5583 days | 20% |
| Alex D'Souza | 7/10 | 5633 days | 25% |
| Patrick | 9/10 | 5663 days | 29% |
| billdee | 10/10 | 5694 days | 29% |
| EvertG | 8/10 | 5797 days | 28% |
| KatrinK | 10/10 | 5809 days | 29% |
| David | 8/10 | 5816 days | 28% |
| neeltjec | 9/10 | 5816 days | 29% |
| monikav | 10/10 | 5816 days | 29% |
| Martien van Brakel | 9/10 | 5816 days | 29% |
| kymberlyw | 9/10 | 5817 days | 29% |
| Katy1 | 8/10 | 5818 days | 28% |
| Anneleen | 8/10 | 5846 days | 28% |
| RosC | 6/10 | 5851 days | 20% |
| Simon | 9/10 | 5865 days | 29% |
| Gunhild | 9/10 | 5880 days | 29% |
| Lars | 10/10 | 5883 days | 29% |
| Miha | 7/10 | 5921 days | 25% |
| Ana | 7/10 | 5928 days | 25% |
| Cindy | 9/10 | 5929 days | 29% |
| Mark | 9/10 | 5947 days | 29% |
| Stephanie Schikora | 10/10 | 5959 days | 29% |
| Rhys Howell | 6/10 | 6150 days | 20% |
| Ben | 9/10 | 6187 days | 29% |
| Vikki | 10/10 | 6192 days | 29% |
| Kelly Noirin | 8/10 | 6203 days | 28% |
| Ohad | 9/10 | 6209 days | 29% |
| Trinkler | 9/10 | 6209 days | 29% |
| Nancy Dol | 9/10 | 6213 days | 29% |
| George Clark | 7/10 | 6213 days | 25% |
| Kathy Hawey | 8/10 | 6215 days | 28% |
| Myrtille de Vries | 9/10 | 6220 days | 29% |
| Buys | 9/10 | 6221 days | 29% |
| Haemnerli | 8/10 | 6221 days | 28% |
| Vaclaf | 9/10 | 6227 days | 29% |
| Jenny Hulsebosch | 9/10 | 6244 days | 29% |
| Willemien | 8/10 | 6308 days | 28% |
| Vern | 7/10 | 6418 days | 25% |
| James | 8/10 | 6418 days | 28% |
| Rietveld | 8/10 | 6574 days | 28% |
| Janne | 8/10 | 6586 days | 28% |
| Nina | 3/10 | 6588 days | 0% |
| Inga | 4/10 | 6588 days | 7% |
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 Swim with the Dolphins experience has plenty of reviews and does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
Recent Reviews Adjustment
-4.09% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 55 days. However the Swim with the Dolphins 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 Swim with the Dolphins experience has been adjusted for 200 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 197 | -4.03% |
| 198 | -4.05% |
| 199 | -4.07% |
| 200 | -4.09% |
| 201 | -4.11% |
| 202 | -4.13% |
| 203 | -4.15% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
3.91% 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
81%
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.