G'day, 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 Lowburn Harbour.
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>)
Lowburn Harbour
Valid Reviews
110 Valid Reviews
The Lowburn Harbour experience has a total of 113 reviews. There are 110 valid reviews that are included when calculating the ranking score and 3 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 110 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 23 |
|
21% |
| 9/10 | 26 |
|
24% |
| 8/10 | 43 |
|
39% |
| 7/10 | 14 |
|
13% |
| 6/10 | 4 |
|
4% |
| 5/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
84.55% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Lowburn Harbour valid reviews is 84.55% and is based on 110 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
7 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 110 valid reviews, the experience has 7 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 7 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 2 |
|
29% |
| 9/10 | 2 |
|
29% |
| 8/10 | 2 |
|
29% |
| 7/10 | 1 |
|
14% |
| 6/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 5/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
87.14% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Lowburn Harbour face-to-face reviews is 87.14% and is based on 7 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
85.50%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jessica Heinrich | 10/10 | 58 days | 100% |
| Fredrik | 8/10 | 89 days | 98% |
| Patrick | 6/10 | 120 days | 86% |
| inga vossebrink | 9/10 | 120 days | 98% |
| Diane n Dave | 8/10 | 120 days | 97% |
| Freedomcamper | 10/10 | 120 days | 99% |
| Mladen Savov | 9/10 | 120 days | 98% |
| Ryan | 10/10 | 150 days | 99% |
| Aaron | 8/10 | 181 days | 96% |
| Walvins | 9/10 | 211 days | 97% |
| Ann | 9/10 | 424 days | 89% |
| Nina S. Larsen | 8/10 | 424 days | 88% |
| Jim Dodd | 9/10 | 455 days | 87% |
| Jamie | 7/10 | 455 days | 82% |
| Patrick | 8/10 | 486 days | 85% |
| Holly | 6/10 | 486 days | 75% |
| Katrine | 7/10 | 516 days | 79% |
| Cholly | 9/10 | 547 days | 82% |
| Donna Harbidge | 10/10 | 577 days | 81% |
| Kelsie | 10/10 | 608 days | 79% |
| Basil | 8/10 | 700 days | 71% |
| Amy Fortin-Barrette | 8/10 | 700 days | 71% |
| Taylor Russell | 10/10 | 700 days | 72% |
| Christy | 8/10 | 700 days | 71% |
| Melanie | 10/10 | 730 days | 70% |
| Niff | 7/10 | 730 days | 65% |
| Fav | 10/10 | 761 days | 67% |
| Josh | 7/10 | 761 days | 62% |
| Emma Brownless | 8/10 | 820 days | 60% |
| Tom | 8/10 | 820 days | 60% |
| Tina Czaja | 10/10 | 851 days | 59% |
| Kathryn | 8/10 | 1095 days | 35% |
| Jess | 10/10 | 1095 days | 35% |
| Jenny | 8/10 | 1095 days | 35% |
| Jenna | 8/10 | 1216 days | 26% |
| Shykiwi | 8/10 | 1216 days | 26% |
| Bethan | 8/10 | 1460 days | 12% |
| Leon | 10/10 | 1491 days | 11% |
| Wai wai | 9/10 | 1491 days | 11% |
| Valg | 8/10 | 1519 days | 10% |
| Leslie | 9/10 | 1550 days | 9% |
| Daniel | 9/10 | 1642 days | 7% |
| Joanne | 8/10 | 1642 days | 7% |
| Justine | 10/10 | 1764 days | 5% |
| Jood | 7/10 | 1856 days | 4% |
| Liz Wade | 7/10 | 1884 days | 4% |
| Marianna | 9/10 | 1885 days | 5% |
| Linda | 8/10 | 1885 days | 5% |
| Sabine | 8/10 | 1916 days | 5% |
| Fer | 9/10 | 1947 days | 5% |
| Vasudev Rupanaguntla | 10/10 | 1947 days | 5% |
| Lisa | 10/10 | 1977 days | 4% |
| Ambs | 8/10 | 2008 days | 4% |
| Mike Sc | 9/10 | 2008 days | 4% |
| Taylor | 8/10 | 2191 days | 4% |
| Kipnkeri | 10/10 | 2191 days | 4% |
| Glen Marshall UK | 9/10 | 2222 days | 4% |
| Freya | 8/10 | 2222 days | 4% |
| Aisling | 8/10 | 2222 days | 4% |
| Clare & Gerry | 10/10 | 2222 days | 4% |
| Pat Burns | 8/10 | 2222 days | 4% |
| Mads Mossin | 8/10 | 2222 days | 4% |
| Pedro | 10/10 | 2250 days | 4% |
| Joanne | 10/10 | 2312 days | 4% |
| Eranda | 10/10 | 2373 days | 4% |
| Rugby | 7/10 | 2373 days | 3% |
| Mike Fricker | 8/10 | 2373 days | 4% |
| Raja Azizul | 6/10 | 2373 days | 3% |
| Sophie Skinner | 9/10 | 2373 days | 4% |
| Jonas R. | 8/10 | 2373 days | 4% |
| Sue | 8/10 | 2465 days | 3% |
| Christian Oerlemans | 7/10 | 2599 days | 3% |
| Katharina Pisarew | 10/10 | 2621 days | 2% |
| Fei Fei Lei | 7/10 | 2636 days | 2% |
| Meg X | 9/10 | 2645 days | 3% |
| Ricky Nurhayati | 9/10 | 2648 days | 3% |
| Ronald Daigneault | 8/10 | 2670 days | 2% |
| Debbie Lesurf | 10/10 | 2677 days | 3% |
| Grace White | 7/10 | 2908 days | 2% |
| P Poiraa | 8/10 | 2958 days | 3% |
| Michel Baumgartner | 8/10 | 2962 days | 3% |
| Craig Eagleton | 8/10 | 2985 days | 2% |
| Daniel Baeyens | 9/10 | 3011 days | 2% |
| Rhea Welsh-Hussain | 9/10 | 3030 days | 2% |
| Nicola Barlow | 9/10 | 3037 days | 2% |
| Derek Drost | 8/10 | 3107 days | 2% |
| Syed Mohd Muhafiz Syed Mohd Bakar | 9/10 | 3255 days | 2% |
| Chadd Holland | 10/10 | 3288 days | 2% |
| Sam Smith-Palomeque | 8/10 | 3303 days | 2% |
| Antonio BENITEZ | 6/10 | 3376 days | 1% |
| Ana Guimaraes | 8/10 | 3417 days | 2% |
| Miaomace | 9/10 | 3469 days | 2% |
| Darwin Dean | 9/10 | 3624 days | 1% |
| Lenka Korinkova | 10/10 | 3670 days | 1% |
| Jiri Benda | 9/10 | 3670 days | 1% |
| Katharina Block | 9/10 | 3673 days | 1% |
| Mike Merrick | 8/10 | 3681 days | 1% |
| Andrew Cruickshank | 7/10 | 3682 days | 1% |
| Lieselotte Michels | 9/10 | 3715 days | 1% |
| Sebastian Sanne | 8/10 | 3726 days | 1% |
| Lindsay Berquist | 8/10 | 3987 days | 1% |
| Justin globalgauthiers.blogspot.com | 7/10 | 4017 days | 0% |
| Mike Fricker | 8/10 | 4017 days | 0% |
| Jesse Farrell | 8/10 | 4116 days | 0% |
| Rhi | 9/10 | 4199 days | 0% |
| Steve Warren | 8/10 | 4229 days | 0% |
| Team Kim&James | 8/10 | 4260 days | 0% |
| Matt & Sue Standish | 7/10 | 4382 days | 1% |
| auré bis | 7/10 | 4472 days | 1% |
| Judith & John Bishop | 8/10 | 5144 days | 1% |
Adjustments
No Adjustment
Several adjustments to the weighted average may be added to improve relevancy and credibility. Lowburn Harbour does not meet the criteria for any of these adjustments to apply.
Balancing Adjustment
1.73% 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
87%
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.