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
96.28%
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 | 127 days | 100% |
| Nick | 9/10 | 2743 days | 3% |
| Mike Dw | 10/10 | 2800 days | 3% |
| Nicole Kasischke | 10/10 | 2806 days | 3% |
| Heather Flanders | 8/10 | 3025 days | 2% |
| Melanie and Pascal | 8/10 | 3052 days | 2% |
| Sebastian and Johanna | 9/10 | 3061 days | 2% |
| Tereza Bulova | 9/10 | 3080 days | 2% |
| Bernd Giermann | 8/10 | 3099 days | 2% |
| Magdalena | 7/10 | 3124 days | 2% |
| Kayla | 10/10 | 3143 days | 2% |
| Sean | 10/10 | 3143 days | 2% |
| Louis Nilsson | 10/10 | 3145 days | 2% |
| Lene Nilsson | 10/10 | 3145 days | 2% |
| Janina | 10/10 | 3150 days | 2% |
| Evelyn Rloeh | 7/10 | 3151 days | 2% |
| Gio Zy | 8/10 | 3154 days | 2% |
| Kirsty Smith | 10/10 | 3170 days | 2% |
| Huon | 8/10 | 3387 days | 2% |
| Ana Coulee | 9/10 | 3388 days | 2% |
| Cecile Santiaux | 10/10 | 3388 days | 2% |
| Molly Bogeberg | 9/10 | 3393 days | 2% |
| Jenna Kuittinen | 8/10 | 3394 days | 2% |
| Ben Keiser | 10/10 | 3395 days | 2% |
| Tom Teuber | 10/10 | 3397 days | 2% |
| Anika Danits | 10/10 | 3397 days | 2% |
| Valerie Bernardini | 10/10 | 3403 days | 2% |
| Dan Ramsl | 10/10 | 3408 days | 2% |
| Lauren Dinnage | 10/10 | 3414 days | 2% |
| Patrick Thumeyer | 10/10 | 3414 days | 2% |
| Max | 10/10 | 3415 days | 2% |
| John and Jan | 9/10 | 3416 days | 2% |
| Volker Stroenisch | 10/10 | 3420 days | 2% |
| Josh Symons | 10/10 | 3421 days | 2% |
| Emily Garside | 10/10 | 3422 days | 2% |
| Chandra Macraigne | 7/10 | 3422 days | 1% |
| Horitz | 10/10 | 3427 days | 2% |
| Dani | 10/10 | 3427 days | 2% |
| Lee Sandberg | 8/10 | 3432 days | 2% |
| Tina Rust | 10/10 | 3433 days | 2% |
| William Lendway | 9/10 | 3434 days | 2% |
| Sophie Kalnymsky | 10/10 | 3435 days | 2% |
| Xavier Bistodeau | 10/10 | 3439 days | 2% |
| Quinn McCusker | 10/10 | 3443 days | 2% |
| Maria and Grace | 6/10 | 3445 days | 1% |
| Maria Brauherr | 10/10 | 3446 days | 2% |
| Veronique Kaplan | 10/10 | 3447 days | 2% |
| Christine Schtenker | 10/10 | 3450 days | 2% |
| Kristyna Mokrackoua | 9/10 | 3452 days | 1% |
| Florian Mueller | 10/10 | 3454 days | 2% |
| Anna | 10/10 | 3454 days | 2% |
| Iris Kerbler | 10/10 | 3458 days | 2% |
| Livia and Dave | 10/10 | 3460 days | 1% |
| Elisabeth Grabner | 7/10 | 3461 days | 1% |
| Christian Reimund | 9/10 | 3463 days | 1% |
| Stefanie Giese | 10/10 | 3463 days | 1% |
| Kim and Leon | 10/10 | 3467 days | 1% |
| Matthew Hallowell | 10/10 | 3471 days | 1% |
| Justin Kechanski | 8/10 | 3489 days | 1% |
| Steffen and Johannes | 9/10 | 3493 days | 1% |
| Ixtaso Roncal | 10/10 | 3538 days | 1% |
| Naelan Le Borgue | 10/10 | 3770 days | 1% |
| Oliver Pester | 10/10 | 3780 days | 1% |
| Kristina M | 10/10 | 3808 days | 1% |
| Bes | 10/10 | 3813 days | 1% |
| Inge van Noorf | 10/10 | 3867 days | 1% |
| FlyingKiwiGirl | 10/10 | 3961 days | 1% |
| Caroline Jonsson | 10/10 | 4113 days | 0% |
| Jonny Ronnblom | 10/10 | 4113 days | 0% |
| Martin Buchta | 9/10 | 4145 days | 0% |
| Anne Haenchen | 9/10 | 4145 days | 0% |
| Markus | 10/10 | 4156 days | 0% |
| Cornelia Witte | 10/10 | 4156 days | 0% |
| Sarah | 10/10 | 4169 days | 0% |
| Mike Majnik | 10/10 | 4169 days | 0% |
| Pioter Jurkowski | 10/10 | 4204 days | 0% |
| Patrick | 8/10 | 4204 days | 0% |
| Emma | 7/10 | 4204 days | 0% |
| Christin Woelk | 10/10 | 4474 days | 1% |
| Patrick Stoeit | 10/10 | 4484 days | 1% |
| Pete Wilson | 10/10 | 4496 days | 1% |
| Yu-Ti Chu | 9/10 | 4501 days | 1% |
| Alice Berg | 10/10 | 4503 days | 1% |
| Camille Coombes | 9/10 | 4503 days | 1% |
| Jan | 10/10 | 4510 days | 1% |
| Frederic Birke | 10/10 | 4512 days | 1% |
| Glenn Surzur | 8/10 | 4512 days | 1% |
| Caderet | 10/10 | 4512 days | 1% |
| Jan & Jile | 10/10 | 4515 days | 1% |
| Lars Schulz | 10/10 | 4525 days | 1% |
| N smith | 10/10 | 4569 days | 1% |
| Michael Kretzschmar | 10/10 | 4586 days | 1% |
| Tanja Rudolf | 10/10 | 4588 days | 1% |
| Peter Adams | 9/10 | 4869 days | 1% |
| Martin Guillaume | 10/10 | 4871 days | 1% |
| Jeroen Bartos | 9/10 | 4888 days | 1% |
| Jon Winter | 9/10 | 4890 days | 1% |
| Roeland Driessen | 10/10 | 4935 days | 1% |
| Rachel_Flowers | 10/10 | 4966 days | 1% |
| Sid | 10/10 | 4996 days | 1% |
| Alibeare | 10/10 | 5027 days | 1% |
| Susannah Eduart | 10/10 | 5221 days | 1% |
| Ann-Katrine & Sille | 10/10 | 5239 days | 1% |
| Josef & Christine Evers | 9/10 | 5250 days | 1% |
| Petersen | 10/10 | 5262 days | 1% |
| Gerry Nichols | 10/10 | 5264 days | 1% |
| Helen T | 10/10 | 5575 days | 1% |
| Bob Lenihan | 10/10 | 5592 days | 1% |
| Radek Hoferek | 9/10 | 5630 days | 1% |
| Pam K | 10/10 | 5633 days | 1% |
| Sabine Locker | 10/10 | 5650 days | 1% |
| csziegler | 10/10 | 5680 days | 1% |
| Rankers Rocks | 10/10 | 5696 days | 1% |
| Tait Suridge | 8/10 | 5707 days | 1% |
| Becca1 | 9/10 | 5942 days | 1% |
| Barry Treve | 9/10 | 5947 days | 1% |
| AnjaChrist | 10/10 | 5958 days | 1% |
| qofd | 10/10 | 6641 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
0.32% 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.