Hey, 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 Craters of the Moon.
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.
Craters of the Moon
Valid Reviews
66 Valid Reviews
The Craters of the Moon experience has a total of 66 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 66 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 3 |
|
5% |
| 9/10 | 10 |
|
15% |
| 8/10 | 14 |
|
21% |
| 7/10 | 16 |
|
24% |
| 6/10 | 8 |
|
12% |
| 5/10 | 4 |
|
6% |
| 4/10 | 8 |
|
12% |
| 3/10 | 2 |
|
3% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 1 |
|
2% |
68.33% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Craters of the Moon valid reviews is 68.33% and is based on 66 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
56 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 66 valid reviews, the experience has 56 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 56 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 2 |
|
4% |
| 9/10 | 9 |
|
16% |
| 8/10 | 12 |
|
21% |
| 7/10 | 14 |
|
25% |
| 6/10 | 7 |
|
13% |
| 5/10 | 3 |
|
5% |
| 4/10 | 7 |
|
13% |
| 3/10 | 2 |
|
4% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
68.93% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Craters of the Moon face-to-face reviews is 68.93% and is based on 56 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
70.69%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ngamarama Mataio | 4/10 | 1722 days | 100% |
| Michael Bley | 7/10 | 3245 days | 56% |
| Connor Hormell | 10/10 | 3307 days | 57% |
| Karlee Hormell | 9/10 | 3308 days | 56% |
| Lucy Millett | 5/10 | 3310 days | 43% |
| Mona Uttendorf | 6/10 | 3311 days | 48% |
| Lisa | 8/10 | 3317 days | 55% |
| Barbara | 10/10 | 3319 days | 56% |
| Menguy Thibault | 6/10 | 3550 days | 37% |
| Anna Lerchl | 8/10 | 3575 days | 41% |
| Hannes | 9/10 | 3577 days | 42% |
| Marlene Buchwald | 4/10 | 3594 days | 26% |
| Andreas Schiefer | 9/10 | 3610 days | 40% |
| Catharina Cuntz | 9/10 | 3614 days | 40% |
| Franziska and Sabine | 7/10 | 3621 days | 37% |
| Thomas and Katia | 6/10 | 3654 days | 32% |
| Michal Kamradek | 7/10 | 4014 days | 17% |
| Jutta Bernhart | 6/10 | 4027 days | 15% |
| Richard | 7/10 | 4187 days | 8% |
| Ondrej Stepanek | 3/10 | 4279 days | 1% |
| Boneschova Jarka | 7/10 | 4279 days | 3% |
| Jakub Stastny | 4/10 | 4280 days | 2% |
| Granjon | 8/10 | 4311 days | 2% |
| Miriam Grund | 9/10 | 4314 days | 2% |
| Philip Donachie | 8/10 | 4326 days | 1% |
| Max Tetzlaff | 8/10 | 4336 days | 1% |
| Elise Boinnot | 9/10 | 4337 days | 1% |
| Thomas Dequidt | 7/10 | 4337 days | 1% |
| Claudia | 7/10 | 4347 days | 0% |
| Bertrand Gilles | 4/10 | 4657 days | 16% |
| Clodec | 8/10 | 4670 days | 26% |
| ToGy | 1/10 | 5040 days | 10% |
| Slangen | 7/10 | 5062 days | 24% |
| katel86 | 8/10 | 5221 days | 26% |
| Johnno25 | 7/10 | 5283 days | 24% |
| rgoodwi3 | 10/10 | 5313 days | 26% |
| Alice Bastiman | 5/10 | 5383 days | 19% |
| Natalie Maguire | 9/10 | 5389 days | 26% |
| Andreas Rath | 4/10 | 5391 days | 16% |
| Nikolas Woelzel | 3/10 | 5408 days | 13% |
| Adam Hayley | 4/10 | 5418 days | 16% |
| Ines | 8/10 | 5421 days | 26% |
| Derek Archibald | 7/10 | 5427 days | 24% |
| Andrew Hammond | 8/10 | 5557 days | 26% |
| Matt Roper | 8/10 | 5762 days | 26% |
| M and H Lunn | 7/10 | 5780 days | 24% |
| Dersiree Moerbeek | 6/10 | 5797 days | 22% |
| Bram-Jan M | 8/10 | 5798 days | 26% |
| Sebastien Briant | 4/10 | 5798 days | 16% |
| Coby Aalbrecht | 8/10 | 5798 days | 26% |
| Wolfgang G | 9/10 | 5805 days | 26% |
| J P Paulvast | 8/10 | 5813 days | 26% |
| Jorrit Bust | 7/10 | 5813 days | 24% |
| _mel_ | 5/10 | 5830 days | 19% |
| robineth | 4/10 | 5854 days | 16% |
| Mark Piche | 7/10 | 5910 days | 24% |
| KYinNZ | 6/10 | 6013 days | 22% |
| KatieR | 8/10 | 6103 days | 26% |
| Andrew | 9/10 | 6105 days | 26% |
| gerhardm | 6/10 | 6105 days | 22% |
| PeteH1 | 6/10 | 6121 days | 22% |
| AliR | 5/10 | 6121 days | 19% |
| Nick | 9/10 | 6121 days | 26% |
| Andreas | 7/10 | 6177 days | 24% |
| Katherine | 7/10 | 6209 days | 24% |
| Claire | 7/10 | 6217 days | 24% |
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 Craters of the Moon 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 42 days. However the Craters of the Moon 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 Craters of the Moon 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
9.08% 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
76%
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.