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 Naked Bus.
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.
95 Valid Reviews
The Naked Bus experience has a total of 101 reviews. There are 95 valid reviews that are included when calculating the ranking score and 6 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 95 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 7 |
|
7% |
| 9/10 | 18 |
|
19% |
| 8/10 | 20 |
|
21% |
| 7/10 | 13 |
|
14% |
| 6/10 | 6 |
|
6% |
| 5/10 | 3 |
|
3% |
| 4/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 3/10 | 3 |
|
3% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 24 |
|
25% |
60.11% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Naked Bus valid reviews is 60.11% and is based on 95 valid reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here as a comparison to the weighted average.
58 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 95 valid reviews, the experience has 58 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 58 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 6 |
|
10% |
| 9/10 | 16 |
|
28% |
| 8/10 | 17 |
|
29% |
| 7/10 | 11 |
|
19% |
| 6/10 | 5 |
|
9% |
| 5/10 | 2 |
|
3% |
| 4/10 | 1 |
|
2% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
79.48% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Naked Bus face-to-face reviews is 79.48% and is based on 58 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
70.61%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Angela Hills Boughey | 10/10 | 2343 days | 100% |
| craig hardy | 1/10 | 3072 days | 25% |
| Viv stefadouros | 9/10 | 3226 days | 56% |
| Suzanne | 1/10 | 3256 days | 21% |
| kiruthika vijayakumar | 1/10 | 3256 days | 21% |
| Ellie Pask | 1/10 | 3317 days | 20% |
| Justine Langero | 10/10 | 3440 days | 46% |
| SR SR | 1/10 | 3560 days | 15% |
| Tom Anders | 9/10 | 3649 days | 35% |
| Estelle Coquard | 7/10 | 3654 days | 32% |
| Kathrin Redl | 6/10 | 3669 days | 29% |
| Emily Noyd | 8/10 | 3671 days | 33% |
| Maxim Motheus | 8/10 | 3707 days | 32% |
| Emil Black Christian | 9/10 | 3707 days | 32% |
| Charn Tiebtienrat | 1/10 | 3742 days | 12% |
| peter salfrais | 1/10 | 3742 days | 12% |
| Pierre Villaume-Odile | 7/10 | 3765 days | 27% |
| unhappycustomer | 3/10 | 3834 days | 14% |
| Brendan Carton | 1/10 | 3835 days | 10% |
| Funk | 7/10 | 3956 days | 18% |
| Calvin Shi | 1/10 | 4048 days | 6% |
| pat rao | 1/10 | 4076 days | 5% |
| Justin Little | 1/10 | 4107 days | 4% |
| Focalvisions | 7/10 | 4107 days | 11% |
| Mischelle Mills | 1/10 | 4322 days | 0% |
| ilove totravel | 5/10 | 4383 days | 18% |
| Anna Sternberg | 8/10 | 4415 days | 24% |
| Jan Kerkhoff | 9/10 | 4418 days | 24% |
| Daniel Garcia Dezgado | 8/10 | 4423 days | 24% |
| Maria = Moller Hansen | 9/10 | 4425 days | 24% |
| Gassat | 9/10 | 4436 days | 24% |
| Felix | 4/10 | 4462 days | 15% |
| Corban Hill | 1/10 | 4473 days | 9% |
| Cyndyl Richards | 1/10 | 4565 days | 9% |
| John Stroup | 1/10 | 4565 days | 9% |
| paulweig | 8/10 | 4748 days | 24% |
| Epi Gates | 6/10 | 4748 days | 21% |
| Andé Moreira | 1/10 | 4779 days | 9% |
| Stella Thoben | 7/10 | 4781 days | 22% |
| Anna Niesl | 7/10 | 4785 days | 22% |
| Kristina Wells | 1/10 | 4838 days | 9% |
| alastair maceachern | 1/10 | 4838 days | 9% |
| hirini2371 | 1/10 | 4899 days | 9% |
| Lisa Ruhfus | 10/10 | 5153 days | 24% |
| Danpaley | 1/10 | 5204 days | 9% |
| Ashley Mckenney | 8/10 | 5218 days | 24% |
| Isabella Abele | 7/10 | 5235 days | 22% |
| smileyducky | 1/10 | 5326 days | 9% |
| Lennart Lundberg | 7/10 | 5481 days | 22% |
| Claudia Jackson and Geoffroy van Roelenbosch | 7/10 | 5493 days | 22% |
| Chrissy Crebas | 6/10 | 5495 days | 21% |
| Beth and Daisy | 8/10 | 5498 days | 24% |
| Tim Wright | 8/10 | 5536 days | 24% |
| Emma Wilkinson | 8/10 | 5537 days | 24% |
| Katny | 8/10 | 5538 days | 24% |
| SandyS | 8/10 | 5569 days | 24% |
| Katy | 8/10 | 5808 days | 24% |
| Christine T | 8/10 | 5869 days | 24% |
| Marcio Moretti | 9/10 | 5885 days | 24% |
| ohSNAP | 3/10 | 5903 days | 13% |
| Hokang Kim | 3/10 | 5965 days | 13% |
| Lindsay Brown | 5/10 | 5975 days | 18% |
| confederatesoldier | 1/10 | 5995 days | 9% |
| Annabel | 1/10 | 6026 days | 9% |
| miniappleses | 8/10 | 6026 days | 24% |
| Ozhan | 8/10 | 6249 days | 24% |
| Deahne | 8/10 | 6259 days | 24% |
| Yuko | 9/10 | 6259 days | 24% |
| Craig | 10/10 | 6266 days | 24% |
| Constance | 7/10 | 6275 days | 22% |
| Kristen | 8/10 | 6282 days | 24% |
| frank | 5/10 | 6283 days | 18% |
| Grace | 9/10 | 6313 days | 24% |
| Claudia Schmidt | 9/10 | 6325 days | 24% |
| Helga | 6/10 | 6383 days | 21% |
| Sophie | 10/10 | 6406 days | 24% |
| Carmen | 10/10 | 6461 days | 24% |
| Wolfgang | 7/10 | 6481 days | 22% |
| Anke | 8/10 | 6559 days | 24% |
| Hernando | 9/10 | 6585 days | 24% |
| Klaus | 7/10 | 6589 days | 22% |
| Corinne | 8/10 | 6593 days | 24% |
| Yumi | 7/10 | 6602 days | 22% |
| Lena | 8/10 | 6602 days | 24% |
| Vicky Elliott | 9/10 | 6620 days | 24% |
| Sophia | 10/10 | 6622 days | 24% |
| Reina Lohaye | 9/10 | 6624 days | 24% |
| Iain | 9/10 | 6656 days | 24% |
| Gav | 6/10 | 6656 days | 21% |
| Anneli | 6/10 | 6657 days | 21% |
| Davinia | 9/10 | 6684 days | 24% |
| Rob Boston | 1/10 | 6757 days | 9% |
| Will | 9/10 | 6925 days | 24% |
| clairekidd | 9/10 | 6938 days | 24% |
| Silke | 9/10 | 6946 days | 24% |
Several adjustments to the weighted average are added to improve relevancy and credibility. These adjustments apply equally to all experiences that meet the criteria.
No Adjustment
A reasonable number of reviews are necessary in order for the average to be credible and for an experience to take a prime position within the ranking tables. As such, experiences with only a few reviews have a moderated score. This does not mean that the experience or the reviews can't be trusted. The Naked Bus experience has plenty of reviews and does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
-3.74% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 60 days. However the Naked Bus experience does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
In addition, an experience's ranking score may be adjusted for each day there is no new ranking. After 1 day the adjustment comes into effect. The maximum number of days that can be adjusted for is 200 days. Due to the seasonal nature of many businesses, this adjustment is applied dynamically throughout the year.
The Naked Bus experience has been adjusted for 200 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 197 | -3.68% |
| 198 | -3.70% |
| 199 | -3.72% |
| 200 | -3.74% |
| 201 | -3.76% |
| 202 | -3.77% |
| 203 | -3.79% |
| … | … |
8.93% 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 customers 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.
76%
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.