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 Queenstown 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>)
Queenstown isite Visitor Information Centre
Valid Reviews
71 Valid Reviews
The Queenstown isite Visitor Information Centre experience has a total of 72 reviews. There are 71 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 71 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 22 |
|
31% |
| 9/10 | 11 |
|
15% |
| 8/10 | 15 |
|
21% |
| 7/10 | 5 |
|
7% |
| 6/10 | 3 |
|
4% |
| 5/10 | 7 |
|
10% |
| 4/10 | 6 |
|
8% |
| 3/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
78.17% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Queenstown isite Visitor Information Centre valid reviews is 78.17% and is based on 71 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
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 71 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 | 20 |
|
29% |
| 9/10 | 11 |
|
16% |
| 8/10 | 15 |
|
22% |
| 7/10 | 5 |
|
7% |
| 6/10 | 3 |
|
4% |
| 5/10 | 7 |
|
10% |
| 4/10 | 6 |
|
9% |
| 3/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
77.54% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Queenstown isite Visitor Information Centre face-to-face reviews is 77.54% 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.
Weighted Average
93.30%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| RT | 10/10 | 857 days | 100% |
| Danielle | 10/10 | 1040 days | 69% |
| Jennifer Gilbert | 10/10 | 3681 days | 2% |
| Rebecca Wharton | 9/10 | 3704 days | 2% |
| Tom Grigg | 10/10 | 3729 days | 2% |
| Laura and Marie | 4/10 | 3740 days | 1% |
| Kilian Vos | 8/10 | 3764 days | 1% |
| Jam Boggomann | 10/10 | 3775 days | 1% |
| Patricia Revel | 5/10 | 4024 days | 0% |
| Claudia Hillebrand | 5/10 | 4027 days | 0% |
| Julian Kuemme | 7/10 | 4029 days | 0% |
| Andrea Sole | 8/10 | 4029 days | 0% |
| Helen Olsson | 4/10 | 4030 days | 0% |
| Mandy Reich | 8/10 | 4030 days | 0% |
| Patricia Erni | 10/10 | 4032 days | 1% |
| Robert Erni | 10/10 | 4032 days | 1% |
| Lilli Erni | 10/10 | 4032 days | 1% |
| Manuel Bleiker | 10/10 | 4032 days | 1% |
| Mark | 8/10 | 4036 days | 0% |
| Jana Rutkowski | 10/10 | 4040 days | 0% |
| Dennis Philippi | 10/10 | 4040 days | 0% |
| Helene Andersen | 6/10 | 4049 days | 0% |
| Oliver Blackmore | 10/10 | 4053 days | 0% |
| Siobhan Mee | 8/10 | 4053 days | 0% |
| Benoit Irissou | 4/10 | 4054 days | 0% |
| Andrea Morello | 8/10 | 4056 days | 0% |
| Mara | 8/10 | 4056 days | 0% |
| Sophie Wolters | 9/10 | 4062 days | 0% |
| Mike Gemmill | 10/10 | 4065 days | 0% |
| Francisco Pablo Miguel | 4/10 | 4079 days | 0% |
| Inga Memmen | 10/10 | 4080 days | 0% |
| Emma Wallace | 9/10 | 4088 days | 0% |
| Lena Jensen | 8/10 | 4089 days | 0% |
| Jesper Andersen | 8/10 | 4089 days | 0% |
| Bella Danaher | 9/10 | 4091 days | 0% |
| Daniel Danamer | 10/10 | 4091 days | 0% |
| Uta Dingebauer | 6/10 | 4098 days | 0% |
| Gal Bero | 5/10 | 4116 days | 0% |
| Daniel McAlpine | 5/10 | 4118 days | 0% |
| Yvonne Horpershoeh | 7/10 | 4121 days | 0% |
| Sven Woelk | 8/10 | 4383 days | 1% |
| Annika Schmidt | 8/10 | 4393 days | 1% |
| Patrick Stoeit | 7/10 | 4393 days | 1% |
| Marco Schmidt | 8/10 | 4398 days | 1% |
| Christian Schumacher | 8/10 | 4398 days | 1% |
| Lisa | 4/10 | 4403 days | 0% |
| Socea | 6/10 | 4403 days | 1% |
| Brandon Wells | 9/10 | 4406 days | 1% |
| Luise Fuchs | 9/10 | 4409 days | 1% |
| Postel Ge | 10/10 | 4411 days | 1% |
| Claire | 7/10 | 4419 days | 1% |
| Lydia Kleinkoenen | 5/10 | 4423 days | 1% |
| Hannah Lia-Isis Kubillus | 1/10 | 4423 days | 0% |
| Justin Leest | 10/10 | 4423 days | 1% |
| Francis Ruige | 10/10 | 4423 days | 1% |
| Rogier Ramaker | 7/10 | 4424 days | 1% |
| Andrea Lang | 10/10 | 4425 days | 1% |
| Petra Blumberg | 8/10 | 4425 days | 1% |
| Maja Bogdanowicz | 9/10 | 4426 days | 1% |
| Sara Omary | 3/10 | 4429 days | 0% |
| Alison Langley | 8/10 | 4491 days | 1% |
| Mike Edwards | 10/10 | 4494 days | 1% |
| Mark and Eefie | 5/10 | 4494 days | 1% |
| Michael Kretzschmar | 9/10 | 4495 days | 1% |
| Marieke | 5/10 | 4495 days | 1% |
| Sharon Yates | 10/10 | 4497 days | 1% |
| Franz Schueler | 10/10 | 4501 days | 1% |
| Andreas and Christine and Nora Busch | 4/10 | 4508 days | 0% |
| Camille | 9/10 | 4514 days | 1% |
| Auger | 9/10 | 4516 days | 1% |
| Auger | 9/10 | 4516 days | 1% |
Adjustments
No Adjustment
Several adjustments to the weighted average may be added to improve relevancy and credibility. Queenstown isite Visitor Information Centre does not meet the criteria for any of these adjustments to apply.
Balancing Adjustment
0.60% 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.