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 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
96.46%
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 | 279 days | 100% |
| Nick | 9/10 | 2895 days | 3% |
| Mike Dw | 10/10 | 2952 days | 3% |
| Nicole Kasischke | 10/10 | 2958 days | 3% |
| Heather Flanders | 8/10 | 3177 days | 2% |
| Melanie and Pascal | 8/10 | 3204 days | 2% |
| Sebastian and Johanna | 9/10 | 3213 days | 2% |
| Tereza Bulova | 9/10 | 3232 days | 2% |
| Bernd Giermann | 8/10 | 3251 days | 2% |
| Magdalena | 7/10 | 3276 days | 2% |
| Kayla | 10/10 | 3295 days | 2% |
| Sean | 10/10 | 3295 days | 2% |
| Louis Nilsson | 10/10 | 3297 days | 2% |
| Lene Nilsson | 10/10 | 3297 days | 2% |
| Janina | 10/10 | 3302 days | 2% |
| Evelyn Rloeh | 7/10 | 3303 days | 2% |
| Gio Zy | 8/10 | 3306 days | 2% |
| Kirsty Smith | 10/10 | 3322 days | 2% |
| Huon | 8/10 | 3539 days | 2% |
| Ana Coulee | 9/10 | 3540 days | 2% |
| Cecile Santiaux | 10/10 | 3540 days | 2% |
| Molly Bogeberg | 9/10 | 3545 days | 2% |
| Jenna Kuittinen | 8/10 | 3546 days | 2% |
| Ben Keiser | 10/10 | 3547 days | 2% |
| Tom Teuber | 10/10 | 3549 days | 2% |
| Anika Danits | 10/10 | 3549 days | 2% |
| Valerie Bernardini | 10/10 | 3555 days | 2% |
| Dan Ramsl | 10/10 | 3560 days | 2% |
| Lauren Dinnage | 10/10 | 3566 days | 2% |
| Patrick Thumeyer | 10/10 | 3566 days | 2% |
| Max | 10/10 | 3567 days | 2% |
| John and Jan | 9/10 | 3568 days | 2% |
| Volker Stroenisch | 10/10 | 3572 days | 2% |
| Josh Symons | 10/10 | 3573 days | 2% |
| Emily Garside | 10/10 | 3574 days | 2% |
| Chandra Macraigne | 7/10 | 3574 days | 1% |
| Horitz | 10/10 | 3579 days | 2% |
| Dani | 10/10 | 3579 days | 2% |
| Lee Sandberg | 8/10 | 3584 days | 2% |
| Tina Rust | 10/10 | 3585 days | 2% |
| William Lendway | 9/10 | 3586 days | 2% |
| Sophie Kalnymsky | 10/10 | 3587 days | 2% |
| Xavier Bistodeau | 10/10 | 3591 days | 2% |
| Quinn McCusker | 10/10 | 3595 days | 2% |
| Maria and Grace | 6/10 | 3597 days | 1% |
| Maria Brauherr | 10/10 | 3598 days | 2% |
| Veronique Kaplan | 10/10 | 3599 days | 2% |
| Christine Schtenker | 10/10 | 3602 days | 2% |
| Kristyna Mokrackoua | 9/10 | 3604 days | 2% |
| Florian Mueller | 10/10 | 3606 days | 2% |
| Anna | 10/10 | 3606 days | 2% |
| Iris Kerbler | 10/10 | 3610 days | 2% |
| Livia and Dave | 10/10 | 3612 days | 2% |
| Elisabeth Grabner | 7/10 | 3613 days | 1% |
| Christian Reimund | 9/10 | 3615 days | 2% |
| Stefanie Giese | 10/10 | 3615 days | 2% |
| Kim and Leon | 10/10 | 3619 days | 2% |
| Matthew Hallowell | 10/10 | 3623 days | 2% |
| Justin Kechanski | 8/10 | 3641 days | 1% |
| Steffen and Johannes | 9/10 | 3645 days | 1% |
| Ixtaso Roncal | 10/10 | 3690 days | 1% |
| Naelan Le Borgue | 10/10 | 3922 days | 1% |
| Oliver Pester | 10/10 | 3932 days | 1% |
| Kristina M | 10/10 | 3960 days | 1% |
| Bes | 10/10 | 3965 days | 1% |
| Inge van Noorf | 10/10 | 4019 days | 1% |
| FlyingKiwiGirl | 10/10 | 4113 days | 1% |
| Caroline Jonsson | 10/10 | 4265 days | 0% |
| Jonny Ronnblom | 10/10 | 4265 days | 0% |
| Martin Buchta | 9/10 | 4297 days | 0% |
| Anne Haenchen | 9/10 | 4297 days | 0% |
| Markus | 10/10 | 4308 days | 0% |
| Cornelia Witte | 10/10 | 4308 days | 0% |
| Sarah | 10/10 | 4321 days | 0% |
| Mike Majnik | 10/10 | 4321 days | 0% |
| Pioter Jurkowski | 10/10 | 4356 days | 0% |
| Patrick | 8/10 | 4356 days | 0% |
| Emma | 7/10 | 4356 days | 0% |
| Christin Woelk | 10/10 | 4626 days | 1% |
| Patrick Stoeit | 10/10 | 4636 days | 1% |
| Pete Wilson | 10/10 | 4648 days | 1% |
| Yu-Ti Chu | 9/10 | 4653 days | 1% |
| Alice Berg | 10/10 | 4655 days | 1% |
| Camille Coombes | 9/10 | 4655 days | 1% |
| Jan | 10/10 | 4662 days | 1% |
| Frederic Birke | 10/10 | 4664 days | 1% |
| Glenn Surzur | 8/10 | 4664 days | 1% |
| Caderet | 10/10 | 4664 days | 1% |
| Jan & Jile | 10/10 | 4667 days | 1% |
| Lars Schulz | 10/10 | 4677 days | 1% |
| N smith | 10/10 | 4721 days | 1% |
| Michael Kretzschmar | 10/10 | 4738 days | 1% |
| Tanja Rudolf | 10/10 | 4740 days | 1% |
| Peter Adams | 9/10 | 5021 days | 1% |
| Martin Guillaume | 10/10 | 5023 days | 1% |
| Jeroen Bartos | 9/10 | 5040 days | 1% |
| Jon Winter | 9/10 | 5042 days | 1% |
| Roeland Driessen | 10/10 | 5087 days | 1% |
| Rachel_Flowers | 10/10 | 5118 days | 1% |
| Sid | 10/10 | 5148 days | 1% |
| Alibeare | 10/10 | 5179 days | 1% |
| Susannah Eduart | 10/10 | 5373 days | 1% |
| Ann-Katrine & Sille | 10/10 | 5391 days | 1% |
| Josef & Christine Evers | 9/10 | 5402 days | 1% |
| Petersen | 10/10 | 5414 days | 1% |
| Gerry Nichols | 10/10 | 5416 days | 1% |
| Helen T | 10/10 | 5727 days | 1% |
| Bob Lenihan | 10/10 | 5744 days | 1% |
| Radek Hoferek | 9/10 | 5782 days | 1% |
| Pam K | 10/10 | 5785 days | 1% |
| Sabine Locker | 10/10 | 5802 days | 1% |
| csziegler | 10/10 | 5832 days | 1% |
| Rankers Rocks | 10/10 | 5848 days | 1% |
| Tait Suridge | 8/10 | 5859 days | 1% |
| Becca1 | 9/10 | 6094 days | 1% |
| Barry Treve | 9/10 | 6099 days | 1% |
| AnjaChrist | 10/10 | 6110 days | 1% |
| qofd | 10/10 | 6793 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.