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 Wharariki Beach Walk.
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.
Wharariki Beach Walk
Valid Reviews
118 Valid Reviews
The Wharariki Beach Walk experience has a total of 118 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 118 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 80 |
|
68% |
| 9/10 | 21 |
|
18% |
| 8/10 | 11 |
|
9% |
| 7/10 | 5 |
|
4% |
| 6/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 5/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
94.75% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Wharariki Beach Walk valid reviews is 94.75% and is based on 118 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
98 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 118 valid reviews, the experience has 98 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 98 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 62 |
|
63% |
| 9/10 | 19 |
|
19% |
| 8/10 | 11 |
|
11% |
| 7/10 | 5 |
|
5% |
| 6/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 5/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
93.88% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Wharariki Beach Walk face-to-face reviews is 93.88% and is based on 98 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
96.47%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tz | 10/10 | 292 days | 100% |
| Nick | 9/10 | 2908 days | 3% |
| Mike Dw | 10/10 | 2965 days | 3% |
| Nicole Kasischke | 10/10 | 2971 days | 3% |
| Heather Flanders | 8/10 | 3190 days | 2% |
| Melanie and Pascal | 8/10 | 3217 days | 2% |
| Sebastian and Johanna | 9/10 | 3226 days | 2% |
| Tereza Bulova | 9/10 | 3245 days | 2% |
| Bernd Giermann | 8/10 | 3264 days | 2% |
| Magdalena | 7/10 | 3289 days | 2% |
| Kayla | 10/10 | 3308 days | 2% |
| Sean | 10/10 | 3308 days | 2% |
| Louis Nilsson | 10/10 | 3310 days | 2% |
| Lene Nilsson | 10/10 | 3310 days | 2% |
| Janina | 10/10 | 3315 days | 2% |
| Evelyn Rloeh | 7/10 | 3316 days | 2% |
| Gio Zy | 8/10 | 3319 days | 2% |
| Kirsty Smith | 10/10 | 3335 days | 2% |
| Huon | 8/10 | 3552 days | 2% |
| Ana Coulee | 9/10 | 3553 days | 2% |
| Cecile Santiaux | 10/10 | 3553 days | 2% |
| Molly Bogeberg | 9/10 | 3558 days | 2% |
| Jenna Kuittinen | 8/10 | 3559 days | 2% |
| Ben Keiser | 10/10 | 3560 days | 2% |
| Tom Teuber | 10/10 | 3562 days | 2% |
| Anika Danits | 10/10 | 3562 days | 2% |
| Valerie Bernardini | 10/10 | 3568 days | 2% |
| Dan Ramsl | 10/10 | 3573 days | 2% |
| Lauren Dinnage | 10/10 | 3579 days | 2% |
| Patrick Thumeyer | 10/10 | 3579 days | 2% |
| Max | 10/10 | 3580 days | 2% |
| John and Jan | 9/10 | 3581 days | 2% |
| Volker Stroenisch | 10/10 | 3585 days | 2% |
| Josh Symons | 10/10 | 3586 days | 2% |
| Emily Garside | 10/10 | 3587 days | 2% |
| Chandra Macraigne | 7/10 | 3587 days | 1% |
| Horitz | 10/10 | 3592 days | 2% |
| Dani | 10/10 | 3592 days | 2% |
| Lee Sandberg | 8/10 | 3597 days | 2% |
| Tina Rust | 10/10 | 3598 days | 2% |
| William Lendway | 9/10 | 3599 days | 2% |
| Sophie Kalnymsky | 10/10 | 3600 days | 2% |
| Xavier Bistodeau | 10/10 | 3604 days | 2% |
| Quinn McCusker | 10/10 | 3608 days | 2% |
| Maria and Grace | 6/10 | 3610 days | 1% |
| Maria Brauherr | 10/10 | 3611 days | 2% |
| Veronique Kaplan | 10/10 | 3612 days | 2% |
| Christine Schtenker | 10/10 | 3615 days | 2% |
| Kristyna Mokrackoua | 9/10 | 3617 days | 2% |
| Florian Mueller | 10/10 | 3619 days | 2% |
| Anna | 10/10 | 3619 days | 2% |
| Iris Kerbler | 10/10 | 3623 days | 2% |
| Livia and Dave | 10/10 | 3625 days | 2% |
| Elisabeth Grabner | 7/10 | 3626 days | 1% |
| Christian Reimund | 9/10 | 3628 days | 2% |
| Stefanie Giese | 10/10 | 3628 days | 2% |
| Kim and Leon | 10/10 | 3632 days | 2% |
| Matthew Hallowell | 10/10 | 3636 days | 2% |
| Justin Kechanski | 8/10 | 3654 days | 1% |
| Steffen and Johannes | 9/10 | 3658 days | 1% |
| Ixtaso Roncal | 10/10 | 3703 days | 1% |
| Naelan Le Borgue | 10/10 | 3935 days | 1% |
| Oliver Pester | 10/10 | 3944 days | 1% |
| Kristina M | 10/10 | 3972 days | 1% |
| Bes | 10/10 | 3978 days | 1% |
| Inge van Noorf | 10/10 | 4032 days | 1% |
| FlyingKiwiGirl | 10/10 | 4125 days | 1% |
| Caroline Jonsson | 10/10 | 4278 days | 0% |
| Jonny Ronnblom | 10/10 | 4278 days | 0% |
| Martin Buchta | 9/10 | 4310 days | 0% |
| Anne Haenchen | 9/10 | 4310 days | 0% |
| Markus | 10/10 | 4321 days | 0% |
| Cornelia Witte | 10/10 | 4321 days | 0% |
| Sarah | 10/10 | 4334 days | 0% |
| Mike Majnik | 10/10 | 4334 days | 0% |
| Pioter Jurkowski | 10/10 | 4369 days | 0% |
| Patrick | 8/10 | 4369 days | 0% |
| Emma | 7/10 | 4369 days | 0% |
| Christin Woelk | 10/10 | 4639 days | 1% |
| Patrick Stoeit | 10/10 | 4649 days | 1% |
| Pete Wilson | 10/10 | 4661 days | 1% |
| Yu-Ti Chu | 9/10 | 4666 days | 1% |
| Alice Berg | 10/10 | 4668 days | 1% |
| Camille Coombes | 9/10 | 4668 days | 1% |
| Jan | 10/10 | 4675 days | 1% |
| Frederic Birke | 10/10 | 4677 days | 1% |
| Glenn Surzur | 8/10 | 4677 days | 1% |
| Caderet | 10/10 | 4677 days | 1% |
| Jan & Jile | 10/10 | 4680 days | 1% |
| Lars Schulz | 10/10 | 4690 days | 1% |
| N smith | 10/10 | 4734 days | 1% |
| Michael Kretzschmar | 10/10 | 4751 days | 1% |
| Tanja Rudolf | 10/10 | 4753 days | 1% |
| Peter Adams | 9/10 | 5034 days | 1% |
| Martin Guillaume | 10/10 | 5036 days | 1% |
| Jeroen Bartos | 9/10 | 5053 days | 1% |
| Jon Winter | 9/10 | 5055 days | 1% |
| Roeland Driessen | 10/10 | 5100 days | 1% |
| Rachel_Flowers | 10/10 | 5131 days | 1% |
| Sid | 10/10 | 5161 days | 1% |
| Alibeare | 10/10 | 5192 days | 1% |
| Susannah Eduart | 10/10 | 5386 days | 1% |
| Ann-Katrine & Sille | 10/10 | 5404 days | 1% |
| Josef & Christine Evers | 9/10 | 5415 days | 1% |
| Petersen | 10/10 | 5427 days | 1% |
| Gerry Nichols | 10/10 | 5429 days | 1% |
| Helen T | 10/10 | 5740 days | 1% |
| Bob Lenihan | 10/10 | 5757 days | 1% |
| Radek Hoferek | 9/10 | 5795 days | 1% |
| Pam K | 10/10 | 5798 days | 1% |
| Sabine Locker | 10/10 | 5815 days | 1% |
| csziegler | 10/10 | 5845 days | 1% |
| Rankers Rocks | 10/10 | 5861 days | 1% |
| Tait Suridge | 8/10 | 5872 days | 1% |
| Becca1 | 9/10 | 6107 days | 1% |
| Barry Treve | 9/10 | 6112 days | 1% |
| AnjaChrist | 10/10 | 6123 days | 1% |
| qofd | 10/10 | 6806 days | 1% |
Adjustments
No Adjustment
Several adjustments to the weighted average may be added to improve relevancy and credibility. Wharariki Beach Walk does not meet the criteria for any of these adjustments to apply.
Balancing Adjustment
0.30% 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
97%
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.