Ranking Score Explained

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 Coromandel Walkway.

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.

Cymen Crick's avatar

Cymen Crick

Rankers Owner

Coromandel Walkway

Valid Reviews

34 Valid Reviews

The Coromandel Walkway experience has a total of 34 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 34 valid reviews:

Rating Count Percentage
10/10 6
18%
9/10 11
32%
8/10 14
41%
7/10 2
6%
6/10 0
0%
5/10 1
3%
4/10 0
0%
3/10 0
0%
2/10 0
0%
1/10 0
0%

85.29% Average

The raw data average (mean) for all the Coromandel Walkway valid reviews is 85.29% and is based on 34 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

29 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 34 valid reviews, the experience has 29 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.

Below is the distribution of ratings for the 29 face-to-face reviews:

Rating Count Percentage
10/10 4
14%
9/10 10
34%
8/10 12
41%
7/10 2
7%
6/10 0
0%
5/10 1
3%
4/10 0
0%
3/10 0
0%
2/10 0
0%
1/10 0
0%

84.48% Average

The raw data average (mean) for all the Coromandel Walkway face-to-face reviews is 84.48% and is based on 29 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.

Weighted Average

85.63%

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
Linnea Sahlberg 8/10 2610 days 100%
Claudia Schaefer 9/10 2914 days 83%
Christopher Emerich 9/10 2914 days 83%
Sophie Rosenberg 10/10 3176 days 69%
Antonia Gillett 8/10 3196 days 66%
Julie Duvert 9/10 3200 days 66%
Quentin Sauve 8/10 3207 days 65%
Patrick Baritz 8/10 3241 days 63%
Adam Taylor 10/10 3247 days 64%
renee verwey 9/10 3251 days 64%
Nico 7/10 3262 days 59%
Hans 8/10 3277 days 61%
Linda and Gunther 8/10 3280 days 61%
Sebastian Schurchardt 9/10 3283 days 62%
Jakob Gerber 10/10 3297 days 61%
Jurgen Moors 8/10 3666 days 39%
James Russell 7/10 3913 days 23%
Hannah Watt 8/10 3913 days 24%
Mark Hofmann 9/10 3943 days 23%
Charles Busnel 9/10 4003 days 19%
FlyingKiwiGirl 8/10 4271 days 4%
Verena 9/10 4293 days 2%
Cloarec Guillaume 10/10 4297 days 2%
Jan & Jile 10/10 4307 days 2%
Pink 8/10 4335 days 0%
astra 10/10 4606 days 28%
Mike & Suzann 9/10 4678 days 27%
Russell Eames 8/10 4679 days 27%
Ursi Meier 5/10 4690 days 20%
Bart Goovaerts 8/10 4774 days 27%
Lillian van Wegen 8/10 5021 days 27%
Marianne Wheatley 9/10 5021 days 27%
keane 9/10 5473 days 27%
Hansjoerg Ehrmann 8/10 5499 days 27%

Adjustments

No Adjustment

Several adjustments to the weighted average may be added to improve relevancy and credibility. Coromandel Walkway does not meet the criteria for any of these adjustments to apply.

Balancing Adjustment

1.70% 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 folk 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

87%

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.