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 Whakarewarewa.
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>)
Whakarewarewa
Valid Reviews
178 Valid Reviews
The Whakarewarewa experience has a total of 179 reviews. There are 178 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 178 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 26 |
|
15% |
| 9/10 | 33 |
|
19% |
| 8/10 | 53 |
|
30% |
| 7/10 | 37 |
|
21% |
| 6/10 | 14 |
|
8% |
| 5/10 | 6 |
|
3% |
| 4/10 | 3 |
|
2% |
| 3/10 | 3 |
|
2% |
| 2/10 | 2 |
|
1% |
| 1/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
77.53% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Whakarewarewa valid reviews is 77.53% and is based on 178 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
169 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 178 valid reviews, the experience has 169 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 169 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 24 |
|
14% |
| 9/10 | 31 |
|
18% |
| 8/10 | 51 |
|
30% |
| 7/10 | 35 |
|
21% |
| 6/10 | 14 |
|
8% |
| 5/10 | 6 |
|
4% |
| 4/10 | 3 |
|
2% |
| 3/10 | 2 |
|
1% |
| 2/10 | 2 |
|
1% |
| 1/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
77.46% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Whakarewarewa face-to-face reviews is 77.46% and is based on 169 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
82.85%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jane | 9/10 | 481 days | 100% |
| Amy Lord | 10/10 | 2617 days | 4% |
| Chloe B | 8/10 | 2640 days | 4% |
| Richard | 10/10 | 2696 days | 3% |
| Anis Quentin | 9/10 | 2705 days | 3% |
| Dorthe Soeholm | 9/10 | 2977 days | 3% |
| Theerada Wongkaew | 10/10 | 3016 days | 3% |
| Joonas Lehtomaki | 9/10 | 3021 days | 3% |
| Jonathan Verschuuren | 8/10 | 3022 days | 3% |
| Laura David | 9/10 | 3024 days | 3% |
| Michael | 10/10 | 3025 days | 3% |
| Anne | 8/10 | 3025 days | 3% |
| Heyuuiutha Lokithas | 7/10 | 3027 days | 3% |
| Philip Sheridan | 7/10 | 3033 days | 2% |
| Sandra Reynders | 8/10 | 3034 days | 3% |
| Colin George | 10/10 | 3035 days | 3% |
| Alexandra Luerner | 10/10 | 3037 days | 3% |
| Frank Bien | 10/10 | 3037 days | 3% |
| Felicity Ford | 7/10 | 3038 days | 2% |
| Louis Nilsson | 10/10 | 3043 days | 3% |
| Gilbert Baptiste | 6/10 | 3043 days | 2% |
| Emilie Bavard | 6/10 | 3043 days | 2% |
| Barbara | 10/10 | 3052 days | 3% |
| Paul Tysoe | 8/10 | 3060 days | 3% |
| Jessica Nasstrom | 6/10 | 3066 days | 2% |
| ben carroll | 10/10 | 3066 days | 3% |
| Eveline | 8/10 | 3076 days | 3% |
| Henry Ang | 7/10 | 3127 days | 2% |
| Michelle Smit | 9/10 | 3189 days | 2% |
| Gesa Roemer | 4/10 | 3288 days | 1% |
| Gerbrand Smidt | 9/10 | 3295 days | 2% |
| Silvia | 5/10 | 3298 days | 2% |
| Jennifer Nguyen | 8/10 | 3306 days | 2% |
| Robin Stamm | 8/10 | 3306 days | 2% |
| Jonathan Foskett | 6/10 | 3307 days | 2% |
| Clara Guinard | 7/10 | 3309 days | 2% |
| Hannes | 9/10 | 3310 days | 2% |
| John and Jan | 9/10 | 3314 days | 2% |
| Adrienne Hoet | 6/10 | 3315 days | 2% |
| Benoit Leclerc | 7/10 | 3327 days | 2% |
| Raul Ellermann | 6/10 | 3332 days | 2% |
| Catharina Cuntz | 6/10 | 3347 days | 2% |
| Klaas Huis | 8/10 | 3348 days | 2% |
| Maxima Buisan | 7/10 | 3353 days | 2% |
| Niels Hoogendooen | 6/10 | 3355 days | 2% |
| Martina | 9/10 | 3362 days | 2% |
| Martin Bakker | 9/10 | 3390 days | 2% |
| Elisabeth Ringswandl | 9/10 | 3666 days | 1% |
| Thomas Haslbeck | 8/10 | 3666 days | 1% |
| Miriam Burchartz | 10/10 | 3667 days | 1% |
| Leonie Jennings | 9/10 | 3711 days | 1% |
| Trevor Wichman | 8/10 | 3711 days | 1% |
| Sibylle and Nadine | 9/10 | 3759 days | 1% |
| Anne Courtenay | 8/10 | 4050 days | 0% |
| Friederike Kranzin | 10/10 | 4050 days | 0% |
| Amanda | 9/10 | 4053 days | 0% |
| Derek | 8/10 | 4053 days | 0% |
| Juliane | 10/10 | 4055 days | 0% |
| Hannah | 8/10 | 4055 days | 0% |
| Dan Lawson | 10/10 | 4083 days | 0% |
| Henry Thiel | 3/10 | 4083 days | 0% |
| Sina Sacranie | 10/10 | 4083 days | 0% |
| Julia Bonisch | 8/10 | 4086 days | 0% |
| Rupert | 9/10 | 4097 days | 0% |
| Dupont | 7/10 | 4414 days | 1% |
| David Lee | 8/10 | 4420 days | 1% |
| Henrik Steinruecken | 6/10 | 4480 days | 1% |
| Wenmechers | 8/10 | 4488 days | 1% |
| Martin Thomas | 9/10 | 4490 days | 1% |
| Paul Lawrence | 8/10 | 4496 days | 1% |
| Gary Brooks | 8/10 | 4498 days | 1% |
| Marian | 7/10 | 4500 days | 1% |
| Adam Hassan | 9/10 | 4503 days | 1% |
| Gerard van de Ven | 9/10 | 4503 days | 1% |
| Lutz Huuemorder | 8/10 | 4504 days | 1% |
| Julie Lamart | 9/10 | 4507 days | 1% |
| Shannon Taylor | 7/10 | 4507 days | 1% |
| Kerstin | 8/10 | 4513 days | 1% |
| Denny | 10/10 | 4620 days | 1% |
| Petr Stepanek | 10/10 | 4765 days | 1% |
| Sebastian Hol | 5/10 | 4769 days | 1% |
| Jochem Snyders | 9/10 | 4776 days | 1% |
| Vitek | 8/10 | 4777 days | 1% |
| Daniel | 7/10 | 4777 days | 1% |
| Carolin Haas | 5/10 | 4783 days | 1% |
| Pierre Boulanger | 9/10 | 4785 days | 1% |
| Dave Simpson | 7/10 | 4787 days | 1% |
| Monica | 10/10 | 4788 days | 1% |
| Mags Adams | 9/10 | 4788 days | 1% |
| Hardy | 10/10 | 4788 days | 1% |
| Nelly & Lisa | 8/10 | 4789 days | 1% |
| Lepied | 7/10 | 4789 days | 1% |
| Graeme E | 9/10 | 4793 days | 1% |
| Colin Philpott | 9/10 | 4795 days | 1% |
| Kim Thorsted | 7/10 | 4796 days | 1% |
| R Laurysen | 7/10 | 4799 days | 1% |
| Corv V D Hof | 8/10 | 4799 days | 1% |
| Anika | 7/10 | 4801 days | 1% |
| Lilja Bjork Hermannsdottir | 9/10 | 4801 days | 1% |
| Remy van Heugten | 6/10 | 4801 days | 1% |
| Stefan Roehrbein | 8/10 | 4802 days | 1% |
| J Knol | 8/10 | 4828 days | 1% |
| Niels Daubjerg | 9/10 | 4865 days | 1% |
| Peter, Noelle & Susanne | 7/10 | 4867 days | 1% |
| Rebecca & Hugh Small | 5/10 | 4874 days | 1% |
| David & Mary-Jane Ryder | 9/10 | 4876 days | 1% |
| Caroline | 8/10 | 4878 days | 1% |
| Erik Folkersen | 8/10 | 4878 days | 1% |
| Wolfgang Goggel | 10/10 | 4878 days | 1% |
| Leif Sorensen | 8/10 | 4878 days | 1% |
| Andy Lever | 8/10 | 4879 days | 1% |
| Rudy Witt | 7/10 | 4880 days | 1% |
| Matthys van den Heuuel | 7/10 | 4884 days | 1% |
| Robin van der Linden | 8/10 | 5090 days | 1% |
| Petra | 10/10 | 5102 days | 1% |
| Karin & Bastiaan | 8/10 | 5103 days | 1% |
| Kris Gijbels | 9/10 | 5117 days | 1% |
| Danielle | 6/10 | 5117 days | 1% |
| Nathalie | 3/10 | 5123 days | 0% |
| Nicola Thackray | 8/10 | 5126 days | 1% |
| Strieson | 7/10 | 5140 days | 1% |
| Ini & Cees | 7/10 | 5141 days | 1% |
| Peter | 7/10 | 5144 days | 1% |
| Mark Leeuwenburgh | 8/10 | 5144 days | 1% |
| Angela | 9/10 | 5155 days | 1% |
| Eva Weichs | 7/10 | 5157 days | 1% |
| Nicole | 5/10 | 5158 days | 1% |
| Rossiter | 9/10 | 5160 days | 1% |
| Derek Woodward | 10/10 | 5161 days | 1% |
| Elinor Bell | 1/10 | 5162 days | 0% |
| Robin Schomburg | 10/10 | 5164 days | 1% |
| Katrin & Mark | 7/10 | 5167 days | 1% |
| Claudia | 8/10 | 5431 days | 1% |
| krisevelyn | 4/10 | 5443 days | 0% |
| Richard Spore | 9/10 | 5491 days | 1% |
| Mike Peirce | 8/10 | 5498 days | 1% |
| Venot | 8/10 | 5507 days | 1% |
| Christen Hans | 4/10 | 5518 days | 0% |
| Jamie Hallifax | 8/10 | 5523 days | 1% |
| Emily Walters | 8/10 | 5530 days | 1% |
| Ines Diana | 5/10 | 5531 days | 1% |
| Wolfgang G | 10/10 | 5538 days | 1% |
| mariekef | 8/10 | 5578 days | 1% |
| selinab | 7/10 | 5587 days | 1% |
| Peter Essink | 7/10 | 5596 days | 1% |
| Karin Linder | 8/10 | 5598 days | 1% |
| Helen Pet | 8/10 | 5602 days | 1% |
| Richard Kesteleyn | 2/10 | 5602 days | 0% |
| Solveig Mosinski | 8/10 | 5606 days | 1% |
| Christine Van Den Berg Michele Imbach | 10/10 | 5617 days | 1% |
| Wim Put | 8/10 | 5620 days | 1% |
| eowyn2k | 3/10 | 5624 days | 0% |
| skorn | 7/10 | 5718 days | 1% |
| SSheil | 7/10 | 5826 days | 1% |
| UlaR | 10/10 | 5830 days | 1% |
| straw64 | 8/10 | 5838 days | 1% |
| dieteru | 8/10 | 5838 days | 1% |
| Sarah_rae | 8/10 | 5854 days | 1% |
| Gerd Hebbel | 6/10 | 5854 days | 1% |
| Mick | 7/10 | 5854 days | 1% |
| Jasmin | 9/10 | 5868 days | 1% |
| Stefau | 7/10 | 5868 days | 1% |
| MrHebbard | 6/10 | 5871 days | 1% |
| siemen | 2/10 | 5879 days | 0% |
| Van Dam | 7/10 | 5900 days | 1% |
| Gunhild | 8/10 | 5902 days | 1% |
| Oliver | 8/10 | 5902 days | 1% |
| Pavol | 8/10 | 5902 days | 1% |
| KTinga | 8/10 | 5909 days | 1% |
| Michael | 8/10 | 5918 days | 1% |
| Gerits | 7/10 | 5950 days | 1% |
| Sluijs | 7/10 | 5955 days | 1% |
| Inga | 6/10 | 5963 days | 1% |
| Nadia | 7/10 | 5971 days | 1% |
| Naomi Horton | 7/10 | 6231 days | 1% |
| Roger Repolusk | 7/10 | 6235 days | 1% |
| Lena1 | 7/10 | 6238 days | 1% |
| Vaclaf | 8/10 | 6249 days | 1% |
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 Whakarewarewa experience has plenty of reviews and does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
Recent Reviews Adjustment
-3.84% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 59 days. However the Whakarewarewa 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 Whakarewarewa experience has been adjusted for 200 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 197 | -3.78% |
| 198 | -3.80% |
| 199 | -3.82% |
| 200 | -3.84% |
| 201 | -3.86% |
| 202 | -3.88% |
| 203 | -3.90% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
3.28% 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
82%
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.