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 Alpine Recreation.
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.
![](data:image/svg+xml;utf8,<svg width="300" height="300" viewBox="0 0 300 300" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg"><rect id="bg" width="300" height="300" fill="rgb(46,196,145)" /><path d="m 150 605 Q 206 94 -305 150 Q 206 206 150 -305 Q 94 206 605 150 Q 94 94 150 605 z" fill="rgb(70,136,0)" /><path d="m 150 515 Q 296 4 -215 150 Q 296 296 150 -215 Q 4 296 515 150 Q 4 4 150 515 z" fill="rgb(185,119,255)" /><path d="m 150 176 Q 165 135 124 150 Q 165 165 150 124 Q 135 165 176 150 Q 135 135 150 176 z" fill="rgb(209,59,110)" /></svg>)
Alpine Recreation
Valid Reviews
139 Valid Reviews
The Alpine Recreation experience has a total of 139 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 139 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 104 |
|
75% |
| 9/10 | 24 |
|
17% |
| 8/10 | 10 |
|
7% |
| 7/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 6/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 5/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
96.33% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Alpine Recreation valid reviews is 96.33% and is based on 139 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
7 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 139 valid reviews, the experience has 7 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 7 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 2 |
|
29% |
| 9/10 | 3 |
|
43% |
| 8/10 | 2 |
|
29% |
| 7/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 6/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 5/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
90.00% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Alpine Recreation face-to-face reviews is 90.00% and is based on 7 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
96.90%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| A. Mullins | 10/10 | 1706 days | 100% |
| David Mansel | 10/10 | 2011 days | 79% |
| Ash S | 10/10 | 2074 days | 77% |
| Louis Manley | 10/10 | 2103 days | 76% |
| Andrew Isb | 10/10 | 2133 days | 75% |
| Alex Jenner | 10/10 | 2194 days | 73% |
| Annie Wang | 10/10 | 2222 days | 42% |
| Mark Geyle | 10/10 | 2225 days | 71% |
| Oliver Keaveney | 10/10 | 2225 days | 71% |
| Richard Everingham | 9/10 | 2284 days | 69% |
| Michelle Martin | 10/10 | 2284 days | 69% |
| Matt McGilton | 10/10 | 2284 days | 69% |
| Liz Roberts | 10/10 | 2306 days | 69% |
| Rob Morehead | 10/10 | 2345 days | 67% |
| James Harman | 10/10 | 2376 days | 66% |
| dougal s | 10/10 | 2376 days | 66% |
| Snazzi | 10/10 | 2376 days | 66% |
| Peter Good | 10/10 | 2406 days | 65% |
| Graeme Woodward | 10/10 | 2468 days | 63% |
| Mohammed Khudhari | 10/10 | 2559 days | 60% |
| Cheryl Cottine | 10/10 | 2559 days | 60% |
| Carita Johnsson | 9/10 | 2583 days | 58% |
| Susan Langridge | 10/10 | 2618 days | 58% |
| Andrew | 3/10 | 2618 days | 30% |
| Nat Luxton | 10/10 | 2649 days | 57% |
| Halla Malik | 10/10 | 2649 days | 57% |
| Warren Howe | 10/10 | 2680 days | 56% |
| Michael Colavita | 10/10 | 2710 days | 54% |
| Mark Hillman | 8/10 | 2710 days | 53% |
| Tim Clarke | 10/10 | 2710 days | 54% |
| Carol and Ian | 10/10 | 2764 days | 53% |
| Giovanni Sansoni | 9/10 | 2771 days | 52% |
| Lachlan Kennedy | 10/10 | 2802 days | 51% |
| Pim Willemstein | 9/10 | 2812 days | 50% |
| Louise | 10/10 | 2833 days | 50% |
| david john | 10/10 | 2833 days | 50% |
| Sam Walters | 10/10 | 2894 days | 48% |
| Christina Clarke | 10/10 | 2976 days | 45% |
| Julia Davies | 10/10 | 2983 days | 45% |
| Emily Davies | 10/10 | 2983 days | 45% |
| Benoit Berty | 8/10 | 2983 days | 25% |
| Steve Levy | 9/10 | 3045 days | 42% |
| Smith Reynolds | 10/10 | 3075 days | 42% |
| Danguole | 10/10 | 3094 days | 41% |
| Liz Roberts | 10/10 | 3136 days | 40% |
| Jane McRae | 10/10 | 3167 days | 38% |
| Rohan Muir | 9/10 | 3289 days | 34% |
| Tim Bloch | 9/10 | 3349 days | 32% |
| george Burke | 10/10 | 3380 days | 31% |
| Jon Colbert | 10/10 | 3380 days | 31% |
| elaine rowley | 10/10 | 3380 days | 31% |
| Michelle Martin | 10/10 | 3380 days | 31% |
| Judith Goodyear | 8/10 | 3404 days | 16% |
| Stephen Xu | 10/10 | 3411 days | 30% |
| Greg Hall | 10/10 | 3411 days | 30% |
| Jesse | 10/10 | 3411 days | 30% |
| Ashley Bigaran | 8/10 | 3441 days | 28% |
| Lou Julia | 10/10 | 3441 days | 29% |
| Vee Rocket | 10/10 | 3441 days | 29% |
| Michel Lang | 8/10 | 3441 days | 28% |
| Peter Campbell | 10/10 | 3502 days | 27% |
| Roger Palmer | 9/10 | 3502 days | 26% |
| Michael Earle | 9/10 | 3533 days | 25% |
| Andrew Raymer | 8/10 | 3533 days | 25% |
| Kendra Underhill | 10/10 | 3555 days | 25% |
| Tuangpol Kasisil | 10/10 | 3655 days | 21% |
| Dean Schluter | 10/10 | 3655 days | 21% |
| Robert Wieclawski | 9/10 | 3686 days | 20% |
| Geoff Bearne | 9/10 | 3745 days | 18% |
| Brenda Osborne | 10/10 | 3745 days | 18% |
| Susan Rose Williams | 8/10 | 3776 days | 17% |
| Jane Hogarth | 9/10 | 3806 days | 16% |
| Iwao FUJII | 9/10 | 3806 days | 16% |
| Russell | 10/10 | 3898 days | 13% |
| Yiying Zhang | 10/10 | 3898 days | 13% |
| yu wang | 10/10 | 3929 days | 12% |
| Harley12 | 8/10 | 3929 days | 11% |
| sonia hayes | 10/10 | 4020 days | 9% |
| Brett Pawski | 9/10 | 4037 days | 3% |
| Jenny marsden | 10/10 | 4079 days | 6% |
| Katy Glenie | 10/10 | 4104 days | 2% |
| Andrew Oldfield | 9/10 | 4110 days | 5% |
| Ofelia Spycher | 10/10 | 4110 days | 5% |
| Bruce | 10/10 | 4110 days | 5% |
| Bhupesh Bansal | 10/10 | 4110 days | 5% |
| Mark G | 10/10 | 4110 days | 5% |
| Kylie Crawford | 9/10 | 4119 days | 1% |
| Jens Richter | 10/10 | 4141 days | 4% |
| Sarah M | 10/10 | 4141 days | 4% |
| Peter Aimer | 10/10 | 4141 days | 4% |
| Trish Clarkson | 9/10 | 4157 days | 1% |
| Andy Scrase | 10/10 | 4263 days | 0% |
| tony trimble | 10/10 | 4263 days | 0% |
| Roy Jamieson | 10/10 | 4385 days | 14% |
| Chad | 10/10 | 4385 days | 14% |
| mfeild | 10/10 | 4416 days | 14% |
| Charles Lambert | 10/10 | 4444 days | 14% |
| Greg Mauk | 10/10 | 4444 days | 14% |
| Dave Long | 10/10 | 4444 days | 14% |
| Gary_L | 10/10 | 4444 days | 14% |
| ltekapo1 MacLaren | 10/10 | 4475 days | 14% |
| Claudia Risch | 10/10 | 4475 days | 14% |
| rossly | 10/10 | 4506 days | 14% |
| 1785184 | 9/10 | 4506 days | 14% |
| Tooty Fruity | 10/10 | 4506 days | 14% |
| Eileen Lim | 10/10 | 4506 days | 14% |
| Geert_Erika | 10/10 | 4536 days | 14% |
| Monica | 10/10 | 4567 days | 14% |
| RMac | 10/10 | 4597 days | 14% |
| marta | 10/10 | 4628 days | 14% |
| walkpaddleski | 10/10 | 4628 days | 14% |
| Emma Moloney | 10/10 | 4659 days | 14% |
| timezra | 10/10 | 4659 days | 14% |
| markwillers | 10/10 | 4781 days | 14% |
| Melissa | 10/10 | 4810 days | 14% |
| rachelandmark | 10/10 | 4810 days | 14% |
| kandj1 | 10/10 | 4841 days | 14% |
| dakerr | 10/10 | 4872 days | 14% |
| Paulie | 10/10 | 4902 days | 14% |
| SandyC | 10/10 | 4902 days | 14% |
| scottdavidson | 10/10 | 4902 days | 14% |
| olivierbonnet | 10/10 | 4933 days | 14% |
| JFAiken | 10/10 | 4963 days | 14% |
| jaredlaverty | 10/10 | 4963 days | 14% |
| Kiwitony | 10/10 | 4994 days | 14% |
| ruthandjosh | 10/10 | 5025 days | 14% |
| stephenlb | 10/10 | 5116 days | 14% |
| shazza | 9/10 | 5147 days | 14% |
| annappoole | 9/10 | 5147 days | 14% |
| Bob Jordan | 10/10 | 5175 days | 14% |
| hev_81 | 9/10 | 5175 days | 14% |
| odedhoffman | 9/10 | 5237 days | 14% |
| bdb3471 | 9/10 | 5237 days | 14% |
| icewalk1 | 8/10 | 5237 days | 13% |
| MistyBell | 10/10 | 5237 days | 14% |
| vince616 | 9/10 | 5267 days | 14% |
| alpanckhurst | 10/10 | 5267 days | 14% |
| paddy | 8/10 | 5359 days | 13% |
| gedeon | 10/10 | 5359 days | 14% |
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 Alpine Recreation experience has plenty of reviews and does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
Recent Reviews Adjustment
-3.70% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 61 days. However the Alpine Recreation 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 Alpine Recreation experience has been adjusted for 200 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 197 | -3.65% |
| 198 | -3.66% |
| 199 | -3.68% |
| 200 | -3.70% |
| 201 | -3.72% |
| 202 | -3.74% |
| 203 | -3.76% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
0.62% 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
94%
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.