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 | 67 days | 100% |
| Fredrik | 8/10 | 98 days | 98% |
| Patrick | 6/10 | 129 days | 86% |
| inga vossebrink | 9/10 | 129 days | 98% |
| Diane n Dave | 8/10 | 129 days | 97% |
| Freedomcamper | 10/10 | 129 days | 99% |
| Mladen Savov | 9/10 | 129 days | 98% |
| Ryan | 10/10 | 159 days | 99% |
| Aaron | 8/10 | 190 days | 96% |
| Walvins | 9/10 | 220 days | 97% |
| Ann | 9/10 | 433 days | 89% |
| Nina S. Larsen | 8/10 | 433 days | 88% |
| Jim Dodd | 9/10 | 464 days | 87% |
| Jamie | 7/10 | 464 days | 82% |
| Patrick | 8/10 | 495 days | 85% |
| Holly | 6/10 | 495 days | 74% |
| Katrine | 7/10 | 525 days | 79% |
| Cholly | 9/10 | 556 days | 82% |
| Donna Harbidge | 10/10 | 586 days | 81% |
| Kelsie | 10/10 | 617 days | 78% |
| Basil | 8/10 | 709 days | 70% |
| Amy Fortin-Barrette | 8/10 | 709 days | 70% |
| Taylor Russell | 10/10 | 709 days | 71% |
| Christy | 8/10 | 709 days | 70% |
| Melanie | 10/10 | 739 days | 69% |
| Niff | 7/10 | 739 days | 64% |
| Fav | 10/10 | 770 days | 66% |
| Josh | 7/10 | 770 days | 62% |
| Emma Brownless | 8/10 | 829 days | 60% |
| Tom | 8/10 | 829 days | 60% |
| Tina Czaja | 10/10 | 860 days | 58% |
| Kathryn | 8/10 | 1104 days | 34% |
| Jess | 10/10 | 1104 days | 35% |
| Jenny | 8/10 | 1104 days | 34% |
| Jenna | 8/10 | 1225 days | 25% |
| Shykiwi | 8/10 | 1225 days | 25% |
| Bethan | 8/10 | 1469 days | 12% |
| Leon | 10/10 | 1500 days | 11% |
| Wai wai | 9/10 | 1500 days | 11% |
| Valg | 8/10 | 1528 days | 10% |
| Leslie | 9/10 | 1559 days | 9% |
| Daniel | 9/10 | 1651 days | 6% |
| Joanne | 8/10 | 1651 days | 6% |
| Justine | 10/10 | 1773 days | 5% |
| Jood | 7/10 | 1865 days | 4% |
| Liz Wade | 7/10 | 1894 days | 4% |
| Marianna | 9/10 | 1894 days | 5% |
| Linda | 8/10 | 1894 days | 5% |
| Sabine | 8/10 | 1925 days | 5% |
| Fer | 9/10 | 1956 days | 5% |
| Vasudev Rupanaguntla | 10/10 | 1956 days | 5% |
| Lisa | 10/10 | 1986 days | 4% |
| Ambs | 8/10 | 2017 days | 4% |
| Mike Sc | 9/10 | 2017 days | 4% |
| Taylor | 8/10 | 2200 days | 4% |
| Kipnkeri | 10/10 | 2200 days | 4% |
| Glen Marshall UK | 9/10 | 2231 days | 4% |
| Freya | 8/10 | 2231 days | 4% |
| Aisling | 8/10 | 2231 days | 4% |
| Clare & Gerry | 10/10 | 2231 days | 4% |
| Pat Burns | 8/10 | 2231 days | 4% |
| Mads Mossin | 8/10 | 2231 days | 4% |
| Pedro | 10/10 | 2259 days | 4% |
| Joanne | 10/10 | 2321 days | 4% |
| Eranda | 10/10 | 2382 days | 4% |
| Rugby | 7/10 | 2382 days | 3% |
| Mike Fricker | 8/10 | 2382 days | 4% |
| Raja Azizul | 6/10 | 2382 days | 3% |
| Sophie Skinner | 9/10 | 2382 days | 4% |
| Jonas R. | 8/10 | 2382 days | 4% |
| Sue | 8/10 | 2474 days | 3% |
| Christian Oerlemans | 7/10 | 2608 days | 3% |
| Katharina Pisarew | 10/10 | 2630 days | 2% |
| Fei Fei Lei | 7/10 | 2645 days | 2% |
| Meg X | 9/10 | 2655 days | 3% |
| Ricky Nurhayati | 9/10 | 2657 days | 3% |
| Ronald Daigneault | 8/10 | 2679 days | 2% |
| Debbie Lesurf | 10/10 | 2686 days | 3% |
| Grace White | 7/10 | 2917 days | 2% |
| P Poiraa | 8/10 | 2967 days | 3% |
| Michel Baumgartner | 8/10 | 2971 days | 3% |
| Craig Eagleton | 8/10 | 2994 days | 2% |
| Daniel Baeyens | 9/10 | 3020 days | 2% |
| Rhea Welsh-Hussain | 9/10 | 3039 days | 2% |
| Nicola Barlow | 9/10 | 3046 days | 2% |
| Derek Drost | 8/10 | 3116 days | 2% |
| Syed Mohd Muhafiz Syed Mohd Bakar | 9/10 | 3265 days | 2% |
| Chadd Holland | 10/10 | 3297 days | 2% |
| Sam Smith-Palomeque | 8/10 | 3312 days | 2% |
| Antonio BENITEZ | 6/10 | 3386 days | 1% |
| Ana Guimaraes | 8/10 | 3426 days | 2% |
| Miaomace | 9/10 | 3478 days | 2% |
| Darwin Dean | 9/10 | 3633 days | 1% |
| Lenka Korinkova | 10/10 | 3679 days | 1% |
| Jiri Benda | 9/10 | 3679 days | 1% |
| Katharina Block | 9/10 | 3682 days | 1% |
| Mike Merrick | 8/10 | 3690 days | 1% |
| Andrew Cruickshank | 7/10 | 3692 days | 1% |
| Lieselotte Michels | 9/10 | 3724 days | 1% |
| Sebastian Sanne | 8/10 | 3735 days | 1% |
| Lindsay Berquist | 8/10 | 3996 days | 1% |
| Justin globalgauthiers.blogspot.com | 7/10 | 4026 days | 0% |
| Mike Fricker | 8/10 | 4026 days | 0% |
| Jesse Farrell | 8/10 | 4125 days | 0% |
| Rhi | 9/10 | 4208 days | 0% |
| Steve Warren | 8/10 | 4238 days | 0% |
| Team Kim&James | 8/10 | 4269 days | 0% |
| Matt & Sue Standish | 7/10 | 4391 days | 1% |
| auré bis | 7/10 | 4481 days | 1% |
| Judith & John Bishop | 8/10 | 5153 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.