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 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
70.68%
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 | 1719 days | 100% |
| Michael Bley | 7/10 | 3242 days | 55% |
| Connor Hormell | 10/10 | 3304 days | 56% |
| Karlee Hormell | 9/10 | 3305 days | 56% |
| Lucy Millett | 5/10 | 3307 days | 42% |
| Mona Uttendorf | 6/10 | 3308 days | 48% |
| Lisa | 8/10 | 3314 days | 55% |
| Barbara | 10/10 | 3316 days | 56% |
| Menguy Thibault | 6/10 | 3547 days | 37% |
| Anna Lerchl | 8/10 | 3572 days | 41% |
| Hannes | 9/10 | 3574 days | 41% |
| Marlene Buchwald | 4/10 | 3591 days | 26% |
| Andreas Schiefer | 9/10 | 3607 days | 40% |
| Catharina Cuntz | 9/10 | 3611 days | 39% |
| Franziska and Sabine | 7/10 | 3618 days | 37% |
| Thomas and Katia | 6/10 | 3651 days | 32% |
| Michal Kamradek | 7/10 | 4011 days | 17% |
| Jutta Bernhart | 6/10 | 4024 days | 15% |
| Richard | 7/10 | 4184 days | 8% |
| Ondrej Stepanek | 3/10 | 4276 days | 1% |
| Boneschova Jarka | 7/10 | 4276 days | 3% |
| Jakub Stastny | 4/10 | 4277 days | 2% |
| Granjon | 8/10 | 4308 days | 2% |
| Miriam Grund | 9/10 | 4311 days | 2% |
| Philip Donachie | 8/10 | 4323 days | 1% |
| Max Tetzlaff | 8/10 | 4333 days | 1% |
| Elise Boinnot | 9/10 | 4334 days | 1% |
| Thomas Dequidt | 7/10 | 4334 days | 1% |
| Claudia | 7/10 | 4344 days | 0% |
| Bertrand Gilles | 4/10 | 4654 days | 16% |
| Clodec | 8/10 | 4667 days | 25% |
| ToGy | 1/10 | 5037 days | 9% |
| Slangen | 7/10 | 5059 days | 24% |
| katel86 | 8/10 | 5218 days | 25% |
| Johnno25 | 7/10 | 5280 days | 24% |
| rgoodwi3 | 10/10 | 5310 days | 26% |
| Alice Bastiman | 5/10 | 5380 days | 19% |
| Natalie Maguire | 9/10 | 5386 days | 26% |
| Andreas Rath | 4/10 | 5388 days | 16% |
| Nikolas Woelzel | 3/10 | 5405 days | 13% |
| Adam Hayley | 4/10 | 5415 days | 16% |
| Ines | 8/10 | 5418 days | 25% |
| Derek Archibald | 7/10 | 5424 days | 24% |
| Andrew Hammond | 8/10 | 5554 days | 25% |
| Matt Roper | 8/10 | 5759 days | 25% |
| M and H Lunn | 7/10 | 5777 days | 24% |
| Dersiree Moerbeek | 6/10 | 5794 days | 22% |
| Bram-Jan M | 8/10 | 5795 days | 25% |
| Sebastien Briant | 4/10 | 5795 days | 16% |
| Coby Aalbrecht | 8/10 | 5795 days | 25% |
| Wolfgang G | 9/10 | 5802 days | 26% |
| J P Paulvast | 8/10 | 5810 days | 25% |
| Jorrit Bust | 7/10 | 5810 days | 24% |
| _mel_ | 5/10 | 5827 days | 19% |
| robineth | 4/10 | 5851 days | 16% |
| Mark Piche | 7/10 | 5907 days | 24% |
| KYinNZ | 6/10 | 6010 days | 22% |
| KatieR | 8/10 | 6100 days | 25% |
| Andrew | 9/10 | 6102 days | 26% |
| gerhardm | 6/10 | 6102 days | 22% |
| PeteH1 | 6/10 | 6118 days | 22% |
| AliR | 5/10 | 6118 days | 19% |
| Nick | 9/10 | 6118 days | 26% |
| Andreas | 7/10 | 6174 days | 24% |
| Katherine | 7/10 | 6206 days | 24% |
| Claire | 7/10 | 6214 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
-4.06% 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 | -4.00% |
| 198 | -4.02% |
| 199 | -4.04% |
| 200 | -4.06% |
| 201 | -4.08% |
| 202 | -4.10% |
| 203 | -4.12% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
9.09% 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.