Kia ora, 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 Fiordland 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.
![](data:image/svg+xml;utf8,<svg width="300" height="300" viewBox="0 0 300 300" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg"><rect id="bg" width="300" height="300" fill="rgb(46,196,145)" /><path d="m 150 605 Q 206 94 -305 150 Q 206 206 150 -305 Q 94 206 605 150 Q 94 94 150 605 z" fill="rgb(70,136,0)" /><path d="m 150 515 Q 296 4 -215 150 Q 296 296 150 -215 Q 4 296 515 150 Q 4 4 150 515 z" fill="rgb(185,119,255)" /><path d="m 150 176 Q 165 135 124 150 Q 165 165 150 124 Q 135 165 176 150 Q 135 135 150 176 z" fill="rgb(209,59,110)" /></svg>)
Fiordland isite Visitor Information Centre
Valid Reviews
50 Valid Reviews
The Fiordland isite Visitor Information Centre experience has a total of 51 reviews. There are 50 valid reviews that are included when calculating the ranking score and 1 invalid review 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 50 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 14 |
|
28% |
| 9/10 | 14 |
|
28% |
| 8/10 | 12 |
|
24% |
| 7/10 | 3 |
|
6% |
| 6/10 | 1 |
|
2% |
| 5/10 | 2 |
|
4% |
| 4/10 | 2 |
|
4% |
| 3/10 | 1 |
|
2% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 1 |
|
2% |
82.20% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Fiordland isite Visitor Information Centre valid reviews is 82.20% and is based on 50 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
50 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 50 valid reviews, the experience has 50 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 50 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 14 |
|
28% |
| 9/10 | 14 |
|
28% |
| 8/10 | 12 |
|
24% |
| 7/10 | 3 |
|
6% |
| 6/10 | 1 |
|
2% |
| 5/10 | 2 |
|
4% |
| 4/10 | 2 |
|
4% |
| 3/10 | 1 |
|
2% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 1 |
|
2% |
82.20% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Fiordland isite Visitor Information Centre face-to-face reviews is 82.20% and is based on 50 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
85.94%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Annika Fletemeyer | 8/10 | 3696 days | 100% |
| Tarillon Family | 8/10 | 3696 days | 100% |
| Rebecca Wharton | 8/10 | 3721 days | 95% |
| Markus Delinsky | 8/10 | 3732 days | 94% |
| Max Backelandt | 10/10 | 4050 days | 37% |
| Marie Toulemonde | 9/10 | 4050 days | 37% |
| Hanna Liebe | 8/10 | 4054 days | 35% |
| Stefan Glock | 7/10 | 4054 days | 32% |
| Andreas Liebe | 10/10 | 4054 days | 37% |
| Tomas Shairi | 1/10 | 4067 days | 0% |
| Agathe Dupuis | 8/10 | 4068 days | 33% |
| Jonas Hessel | 7/10 | 4068 days | 30% |
| Jonas Foerch | 9/10 | 4071 days | 33% |
| Johanna Kofler | 10/10 | 4074 days | 33% |
| Maria = Moller Hansen | 10/10 | 4082 days | 31% |
| Mike Gemmill | 10/10 | 4082 days | 31% |
| Barbara | 7/10 | 4083 days | 27% |
| Marinette | 10/10 | 4086 days | 31% |
| Denise Ewbank | 9/10 | 4086 days | 30% |
| Tiit Pullerits | 9/10 | 4086 days | 30% |
| Marion Busch | 10/10 | 4086 days | 31% |
| Natalie Boehm | 6/10 | 4087 days | 23% |
| Steffen | 5/10 | 4087 days | 18% |
| Eugen Lehner | 8/10 | 4090 days | 29% |
| Max Stein | 8/10 | 4090 days | 29% |
| Becky Davis | 9/10 | 4098 days | 28% |
| Emilie Chanbon | 8/10 | 4102 days | 27% |
| Guillemette | 5/10 | 4103 days | 15% |
| Markus Spitzmueller | 4/10 | 4106 days | 10% |
| Uta Dingebauer | 3/10 | 4115 days | 3% |
| Sapir Lifshitz | 8/10 | 4120 days | 24% |
| Maya Barad | 10/10 | 4120 days | 24% |
| Julia Amberger | 4/10 | 4121 days | 8% |
| Rainer | 10/10 | 4411 days | 71% |
| Maria Klister | 9/10 | 4420 days | 70% |
| Luise Fuchs | 9/10 | 4426 days | 70% |
| Nicolas Bessiere | 9/10 | 4433 days | 70% |
| Malgorzata | 10/10 | 4440 days | 71% |
| Michal | 10/10 | 4440 days | 71% |
| Przemystaw Tymizyszyn | 9/10 | 4440 days | 70% |
| Harry Findeis | 9/10 | 4445 days | 70% |
| Peter Moederer | 10/10 | 4453 days | 71% |
| Karin Genyn | 10/10 | 4512 days | 71% |
| Andrea Wollmann | 9/10 | 4513 days | 70% |
| Nigel Leighton | 8/10 | 4514 days | 69% |
| Jan | 9/10 | 4514 days | 70% |
| Leticia Martin | 10/10 | 4517 days | 71% |
| Andreas and Christine and Nora Busch | 9/10 | 4525 days | 70% |
| Oliver Kalmbach | 9/10 | 4535 days | 70% |
| Rena and Kirsten | 8/10 | 4540 days | 69% |
Adjustments
No Adjustment
Several adjustments to the weighted average may be added to improve relevancy and credibility. Fiordland isite Visitor Information Centre does not meet the criteria for any of these adjustments to apply.
Balancing Adjustment
1.64% 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
88%
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.