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
117 Valid Reviews
The Wharariki Beach Walk experience has a total of 117 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 117 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 79 |
|
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% |
94.70% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Wharariki Beach Walk valid reviews is 94.70% and is based on 117 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 117 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
93.94%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nick | 9/10 | 2544 days | 100% |
| Mike Dw | 10/10 | 2601 days | 98% |
| Nicole Kasischke | 10/10 | 2607 days | 98% |
| Heather Flanders | 8/10 | 2826 days | 84% |
| Melanie and Pascal | 8/10 | 2853 days | 82% |
| Sebastian and Johanna | 9/10 | 2862 days | 83% |
| Tereza Bulova | 9/10 | 2881 days | 82% |
| Bernd Giermann | 8/10 | 2900 days | 80% |
| Magdalena | 7/10 | 2925 days | 74% |
| Kayla | 10/10 | 2944 days | 79% |
| Sean | 10/10 | 2944 days | 79% |
| Louis Nilsson | 10/10 | 2946 days | 79% |
| Lene Nilsson | 10/10 | 2946 days | 79% |
| Janina | 10/10 | 2951 days | 78% |
| Evelyn Rloeh | 7/10 | 2952 days | 73% |
| Gio Zy | 8/10 | 2955 days | 77% |
| Kirsty Smith | 10/10 | 2971 days | 77% |
| Huon | 8/10 | 3188 days | 64% |
| Ana Coulee | 9/10 | 3189 days | 65% |
| Cecile Santiaux | 10/10 | 3189 days | 65% |
| Molly Bogeberg | 9/10 | 3194 days | 64% |
| Jenna Kuittinen | 8/10 | 3195 days | 64% |
| Ben Keiser | 10/10 | 3196 days | 65% |
| Tom Teuber | 10/10 | 3198 days | 65% |
| Anika Danits | 10/10 | 3198 days | 65% |
| Valerie Bernardini | 10/10 | 3204 days | 64% |
| Dan Ramsl | 10/10 | 3209 days | 64% |
| Lauren Dinnage | 10/10 | 3215 days | 64% |
| Patrick Thumeyer | 10/10 | 3215 days | 64% |
| Max | 10/10 | 3216 days | 64% |
| John and Jan | 9/10 | 3217 days | 63% |
| Volker Stroenisch | 10/10 | 3221 days | 64% |
| Josh Symons | 10/10 | 3222 days | 64% |
| Emily Garside | 10/10 | 3223 days | 63% |
| Chandra Macraigne | 7/10 | 3223 days | 59% |
| Horitz | 10/10 | 3228 days | 63% |
| Dani | 10/10 | 3228 days | 63% |
| Lee Sandberg | 8/10 | 3233 days | 62% |
| Tina Rust | 10/10 | 3234 days | 63% |
| William Lendway | 9/10 | 3235 days | 62% |
| Sophie Kalnymsky | 10/10 | 3236 days | 63% |
| Xavier Bistodeau | 10/10 | 3240 days | 63% |
| Quinn McCusker | 10/10 | 3244 days | 62% |
| Maria and Grace | 6/10 | 3246 days | 53% |
| Maria Brauherr | 10/10 | 3247 days | 62% |
| Veronique Kaplan | 10/10 | 3248 days | 62% |
| Christine Schtenker | 10/10 | 3251 days | 62% |
| Kristyna Mokrackoua | 9/10 | 3253 days | 61% |
| Florian Mueller | 10/10 | 3255 days | 62% |
| Anna | 10/10 | 3255 days | 62% |
| Iris Kerbler | 10/10 | 3259 days | 61% |
| Livia and Dave | 10/10 | 3261 days | 61% |
| Elisabeth Grabner | 7/10 | 3262 days | 57% |
| Christian Reimund | 9/10 | 3264 days | 61% |
| Stefanie Giese | 10/10 | 3264 days | 61% |
| Kim and Leon | 10/10 | 3268 days | 61% |
| Matthew Hallowell | 10/10 | 3272 days | 61% |
| Justin Kechanski | 8/10 | 3290 days | 59% |
| Steffen and Johannes | 9/10 | 3294 days | 59% |
| Ixtaso Roncal | 10/10 | 3339 days | 57% |
| Naelan Le Borgue | 10/10 | 3571 days | 44% |
| Oliver Pester | 10/10 | 3580 days | 44% |
| Kristina M | 10/10 | 3608 days | 42% |
| Bes | 10/10 | 3614 days | 42% |
| Inge van Noorf | 10/10 | 3668 days | 39% |
| FlyingKiwiGirl | 10/10 | 3761 days | 34% |
| Caroline Jonsson | 10/10 | 3914 days | 25% |
| Jonny Ronnblom | 10/10 | 3914 days | 25% |
| Martin Buchta | 9/10 | 3946 days | 23% |
| Anne Haenchen | 9/10 | 3946 days | 23% |
| Markus | 10/10 | 3957 days | 23% |
| Cornelia Witte | 10/10 | 3957 days | 23% |
| Sarah | 10/10 | 3970 days | 22% |
| Mike Majnik | 10/10 | 3970 days | 22% |
| Pioter Jurkowski | 10/10 | 4005 days | 20% |
| Patrick | 8/10 | 4005 days | 20% |
| Emma | 7/10 | 4005 days | 19% |
| Christin Woelk | 10/10 | 4275 days | 5% |
| Patrick Stoeit | 10/10 | 4285 days | 5% |
| Pete Wilson | 10/10 | 4297 days | 4% |
| Yu-Ti Chu | 9/10 | 4302 days | 4% |
| Alice Berg | 10/10 | 4304 days | 4% |
| Camille Coombes | 9/10 | 4304 days | 4% |
| Jan | 10/10 | 4311 days | 3% |
| Frederic Birke | 10/10 | 4313 days | 3% |
| Glenn Surzur | 8/10 | 4313 days | 3% |
| Caderet | 10/10 | 4313 days | 3% |
| Jan & Jile | 10/10 | 4316 days | 3% |
| Lars Schulz | 10/10 | 4326 days | 2% |
| N smith | 10/10 | 4370 days | 0% |
| Michael Kretzschmar | 10/10 | 4387 days | 28% |
| Tanja Rudolf | 10/10 | 4389 days | 28% |
| Peter Adams | 9/10 | 4670 days | 27% |
| Martin Guillaume | 10/10 | 4672 days | 28% |
| Jeroen Bartos | 9/10 | 4689 days | 27% |
| Jon Winter | 9/10 | 4691 days | 27% |
| Roeland Driessen | 10/10 | 4736 days | 28% |
| Rachel_Flowers | 10/10 | 4767 days | 28% |
| Sid | 10/10 | 4797 days | 28% |
| Alibeare | 10/10 | 4828 days | 28% |
| Susannah Eduart | 10/10 | 5022 days | 28% |
| Ann-Katrine & Sille | 10/10 | 5040 days | 28% |
| Josef & Christine Evers | 9/10 | 5051 days | 27% |
| Petersen | 10/10 | 5063 days | 28% |
| Gerry Nichols | 10/10 | 5065 days | 28% |
| Helen T | 10/10 | 5376 days | 28% |
| Bob Lenihan | 10/10 | 5393 days | 28% |
| Radek Hoferek | 9/10 | 5431 days | 27% |
| Pam K | 10/10 | 5434 days | 28% |
| Sabine Locker | 10/10 | 5451 days | 28% |
| csziegler | 10/10 | 5481 days | 28% |
| Rankers Rocks | 10/10 | 5497 days | 28% |
| Tait Suridge | 8/10 | 5508 days | 27% |
| Becca1 | 9/10 | 5743 days | 27% |
| Barry Treve | 9/10 | 5748 days | 27% |
| AnjaChrist | 10/10 | 5759 days | 28% |
| qofd | 10/10 | 6442 days | 28% |
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
0.54% 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
94%
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.