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 Wellington isite Visitor Information Centre.
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.
73 Valid Reviews
The Wellington isite Visitor Information Centre experience has a total of 73 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 73 valid reviews:
Rating | Count | Percentage | |
---|---|---|---|
10/10 | 17 |
|
23% |
9/10 | 17 |
|
23% |
8/10 | 17 |
|
23% |
7/10 | 9 |
|
12% |
6/10 | 4 |
|
5% |
5/10 | 3 |
|
4% |
4/10 | 3 |
|
4% |
3/10 | 2 |
|
3% |
2/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
79.59% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Wellington isite Visitor Information Centre valid reviews is 79.59% and is based on 73 valid reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here as a comparison to the weighted average.
69 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 73 valid reviews, the experience has 69 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 69 face-to-face reviews:
Rating | Count | Percentage | |
---|---|---|---|
10/10 | 16 |
|
23% |
9/10 | 15 |
|
22% |
8/10 | 17 |
|
25% |
7/10 | 9 |
|
13% |
6/10 | 4 |
|
6% |
5/10 | 3 |
|
4% |
4/10 | 2 |
|
3% |
3/10 | 2 |
|
3% |
2/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
79.57% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Wellington isite Visitor Information Centre face-to-face reviews is 79.57% and is based on 69 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
83.24%
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 |
---|---|---|---|
Jamie Serieux | 9/10 | 3377 days | 100% |
Chalie Dotesek | 10/10 | 3473 days | 90% |
Matthias Bohmert | 9/10 | 3786 days | 54% |
Marie Weber | 10/10 | 3794 days | 54% |
Dominik Rehbaum | 9/10 | 3808 days | 51% |
Lea Karl | 10/10 | 3837 days | 49% |
Lagarde | 9/10 | 4092 days | 19% |
Lola | 9/10 | 4093 days | 19% |
Claudia de Winter | 7/10 | 4096 days | 17% |
Mattias | 7/10 | 4096 days | 17% |
Janek Belcher | 9/10 | 4102 days | 18% |
Carolin Siegert | 10/10 | 4102 days | 19% |
Jan Legein | 10/10 | 4102 days | 19% |
Alex | 9/10 | 4103 days | 18% |
Christina | 10/10 | 4107 days | 18% |
Carla Oyarzun | 8/10 | 4107 days | 17% |
Paolo Cases | 3/10 | 4107 days | 4% |
Jenny Finch | 10/10 | 4121 days | 16% |
Adele Grandguillot | 8/10 | 4122 days | 16% |
Hadler | 2/10 | 4126 days | 0% |
Christine Helleiner | 4/10 | 4126 days | 6% |
Felicitas | 4/10 | 4126 days | 6% |
Miriam Grund | 10/10 | 4129 days | 15% |
Andreas Jung | 10/10 | 4132 days | 15% |
Aurelien Noailly | 6/10 | 4133 days | 11% |
Julie Ledanois | 8/10 | 4136 days | 14% |
Pierre Gentile | 9/10 | 4136 days | 14% |
Cindy Benayoum | 6/10 | 4136 days | 11% |
Olivia | 7/10 | 4137 days | 13% |
Jennifer Garner | 3/10 | 4138 days | 2% |
Bernhard Fulterer | 6/10 | 4141 days | 10% |
Klaus Petersen | 5/10 | 4143 days | 7% |
Kristina | 8/10 | 4143 days | 13% |
Joy Lambez | 10/10 | 4150 days | 13% |
Vincent Schaeflier | 9/10 | 4151 days | 13% |
Dan Lawson | 8/10 | 4165 days | 11% |
Sina Sacranie | 7/10 | 4165 days | 10% |
Arnaud Memay | 7/10 | 4177 days | 8% |
Marine | 10/10 | 4181 days | 9% |
Alexandra Kupper | 8/10 | 4187 days | 8% |
Romina Bolz | 7/10 | 4189 days | 7% |
Kellie | 10/10 | 4189 days | 9% |
Mike and Caroline | 4/10 | 4459 days | 25% |
Annika Schmidt | 8/10 | 4464 days | 44% |
Verena | 9/10 | 4481 days | 44% |
Ben Martin | 8/10 | 4483 days | 44% |
Cloarec Guillaume | 9/10 | 4485 days | 44% |
Steen Rausmussen | 9/10 | 4488 days | 44% |
Will and Taylor | 9/10 | 4490 days | 44% |
Hannah Lia-Isis Kubillus | 10/10 | 4494 days | 45% |
Brendon Furney | 5/10 | 4494 days | 31% |
Jacob Bernhardt | 10/10 | 4495 days | 45% |
Jean Raisin | 8/10 | 4496 days | 44% |
Janine Kohlgrueler | 8/10 | 4497 days | 44% |
David Lee | 9/10 | 4502 days | 44% |
Elodie and jo | 8/10 | 4513 days | 44% |
Bene | 9/10 | 4566 days | 44% |
Julien Bocherens | 10/10 | 4566 days | 45% |
Lauret Stulemeyer | 5/10 | 4568 days | 31% |
Moorman | 7/10 | 4571 days | 41% |
Jan Sjoerdtje | 8/10 | 4571 days | 44% |
Alexandra van den Brack | 6/10 | 4577 days | 37% |
Marian | 8/10 | 4582 days | 44% |
Ron | 8/10 | 4584 days | 44% |
Reinhard Stahl | 9/10 | 4585 days | 44% |
Reinhard Stahl | 9/10 | 4585 days | 44% |
Doan | 8/10 | 4585 days | 44% |
Milena Heinrich | 10/10 | 4586 days | 45% |
Faassen | 7/10 | 4588 days | 41% |
Petra | 8/10 | 4591 days | 44% |
Julia Ramseier | 8/10 | 4592 days | 44% |
Lisa Blake | 7/10 | 4596 days | 41% |
Megan Child | 10/10 | 4597 days | 45% |
No Adjustment
Several adjustments to the weighted average may be added to improve relevancy and credibility. Wellington isite Visitor Information Centre does not meet the criteria for any of these adjustments to apply.
2.19% 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.
85%
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.