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 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
96.35%
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 | 327 days | 100% |
| Nick | 9/10 | 2943 days | 3% |
| Mike Dw | 10/10 | 3000 days | 3% |
| Nicole Kasischke | 10/10 | 3006 days | 3% |
| Heather Flanders | 8/10 | 3225 days | 2% |
| Melanie and Pascal | 8/10 | 3252 days | 2% |
| Sebastian and Johanna | 9/10 | 3261 days | 2% |
| Tereza Bulova | 9/10 | 3280 days | 2% |
| Bernd Giermann | 8/10 | 3299 days | 2% |
| Magdalena | 7/10 | 3324 days | 2% |
| Kayla | 10/10 | 3343 days | 2% |
| Sean | 10/10 | 3343 days | 2% |
| Louis Nilsson | 10/10 | 3345 days | 2% |
| Lene Nilsson | 10/10 | 3345 days | 2% |
| Janina | 10/10 | 3350 days | 2% |
| Evelyn Rloeh | 7/10 | 3351 days | 2% |
| Gio Zy | 8/10 | 3354 days | 2% |
| Kirsty Smith | 10/10 | 3370 days | 2% |
| Huon | 8/10 | 3587 days | 2% |
| Ana Coulee | 9/10 | 3588 days | 2% |
| Cecile Santiaux | 10/10 | 3588 days | 2% |
| Molly Bogeberg | 9/10 | 3593 days | 2% |
| Jenna Kuittinen | 8/10 | 3594 days | 2% |
| Ben Keiser | 10/10 | 3595 days | 2% |
| Tom Teuber | 10/10 | 3597 days | 2% |
| Anika Danits | 10/10 | 3597 days | 2% |
| Valerie Bernardini | 10/10 | 3603 days | 2% |
| Dan Ramsl | 10/10 | 3608 days | 2% |
| Lauren Dinnage | 10/10 | 3614 days | 2% |
| Patrick Thumeyer | 10/10 | 3614 days | 2% |
| Max | 10/10 | 3615 days | 2% |
| John and Jan | 9/10 | 3616 days | 2% |
| Volker Stroenisch | 10/10 | 3620 days | 2% |
| Josh Symons | 10/10 | 3621 days | 2% |
| Emily Garside | 10/10 | 3622 days | 2% |
| Chandra Macraigne | 7/10 | 3622 days | 1% |
| Horitz | 10/10 | 3627 days | 2% |
| Dani | 10/10 | 3627 days | 2% |
| Lee Sandberg | 8/10 | 3632 days | 2% |
| Tina Rust | 10/10 | 3633 days | 2% |
| William Lendway | 9/10 | 3634 days | 2% |
| Sophie Kalnymsky | 10/10 | 3635 days | 2% |
| Xavier Bistodeau | 10/10 | 3639 days | 2% |
| Quinn McCusker | 10/10 | 3643 days | 2% |
| Maria and Grace | 6/10 | 3645 days | 1% |
| Maria Brauherr | 10/10 | 3646 days | 2% |
| Veronique Kaplan | 10/10 | 3647 days | 2% |
| Christine Schtenker | 10/10 | 3650 days | 1% |
| Kristyna Mokrackoua | 9/10 | 3652 days | 1% |
| Florian Mueller | 10/10 | 3654 days | 1% |
| Anna | 10/10 | 3654 days | 1% |
| Iris Kerbler | 10/10 | 3658 days | 1% |
| Livia and Dave | 10/10 | 3660 days | 1% |
| Elisabeth Grabner | 7/10 | 3661 days | 1% |
| Christian Reimund | 9/10 | 3663 days | 1% |
| Stefanie Giese | 10/10 | 3663 days | 1% |
| Kim and Leon | 10/10 | 3667 days | 1% |
| Matthew Hallowell | 10/10 | 3671 days | 1% |
| Justin Kechanski | 8/10 | 3689 days | 1% |
| Steffen and Johannes | 9/10 | 3693 days | 1% |
| Ixtaso Roncal | 10/10 | 3738 days | 1% |
| Naelan Le Borgue | 10/10 | 3970 days | 1% |
| Oliver Pester | 10/10 | 3980 days | 1% |
| Kristina M | 10/10 | 4008 days | 1% |
| Bes | 10/10 | 4013 days | 1% |
| Inge van Noorf | 10/10 | 4067 days | 1% |
| FlyingKiwiGirl | 10/10 | 4161 days | 0% |
| Caroline Jonsson | 10/10 | 4313 days | 0% |
| Jonny Ronnblom | 10/10 | 4313 days | 0% |
| Martin Buchta | 9/10 | 4345 days | 0% |
| Anne Haenchen | 9/10 | 4345 days | 0% |
| Markus | 10/10 | 4356 days | 0% |
| Cornelia Witte | 10/10 | 4356 days | 0% |
| Sarah | 10/10 | 4369 days | 0% |
| Mike Majnik | 10/10 | 4369 days | 0% |
| Pioter Jurkowski | 10/10 | 4404 days | 1% |
| Patrick | 8/10 | 4404 days | 1% |
| Emma | 7/10 | 4404 days | 1% |
| Christin Woelk | 10/10 | 4674 days | 1% |
| Patrick Stoeit | 10/10 | 4684 days | 1% |
| Pete Wilson | 10/10 | 4696 days | 1% |
| Yu-Ti Chu | 9/10 | 4701 days | 1% |
| Alice Berg | 10/10 | 4703 days | 1% |
| Camille Coombes | 9/10 | 4703 days | 1% |
| Jan | 10/10 | 4710 days | 1% |
| Frederic Birke | 10/10 | 4712 days | 1% |
| Glenn Surzur | 8/10 | 4712 days | 1% |
| Caderet | 10/10 | 4712 days | 1% |
| Jan & Jile | 10/10 | 4715 days | 1% |
| Lars Schulz | 10/10 | 4725 days | 1% |
| N smith | 10/10 | 4769 days | 1% |
| Michael Kretzschmar | 10/10 | 4786 days | 1% |
| Tanja Rudolf | 10/10 | 4788 days | 1% |
| Peter Adams | 9/10 | 5069 days | 1% |
| Martin Guillaume | 10/10 | 5071 days | 1% |
| Jeroen Bartos | 9/10 | 5088 days | 1% |
| Jon Winter | 9/10 | 5090 days | 1% |
| Roeland Driessen | 10/10 | 5135 days | 1% |
| Rachel_Flowers | 10/10 | 5166 days | 1% |
| Sid | 10/10 | 5196 days | 1% |
| Alibeare | 10/10 | 5227 days | 1% |
| Susannah Eduart | 10/10 | 5421 days | 1% |
| Ann-Katrine & Sille | 10/10 | 5439 days | 1% |
| Josef & Christine Evers | 9/10 | 5450 days | 1% |
| Petersen | 10/10 | 5462 days | 1% |
| Gerry Nichols | 10/10 | 5464 days | 1% |
| Helen T | 10/10 | 5775 days | 1% |
| Bob Lenihan | 10/10 | 5792 days | 1% |
| Radek Hoferek | 9/10 | 5830 days | 1% |
| Pam K | 10/10 | 5833 days | 1% |
| Sabine Locker | 10/10 | 5850 days | 1% |
| csziegler | 10/10 | 5880 days | 1% |
| Rankers Rocks | 10/10 | 5896 days | 1% |
| Tait Suridge | 8/10 | 5907 days | 1% |
| Becca1 | 9/10 | 6142 days | 1% |
| Barry Treve | 9/10 | 6147 days | 1% |
| AnjaChrist | 10/10 | 6158 days | 1% |
| qofd | 10/10 | 6841 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
0.31% 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.