Ranking Score Explained
Hi there, 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 Kea Point Walk.
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.
Kea Point Walk
Valid Reviews
25 Valid Reviews
The Kea Point Walk experience has a total of 25 valid reviews. There are no 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 25 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 5 |
|
20% |
| 9/10 | 7 |
|
28% |
| 8/10 | 8 |
|
32% |
| 7/10 | 5 |
|
20% |
| 6/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 5/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
84.80% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Kea Point Walk valid reviews is 84.80% and is based on 25 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
23 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 25 valid reviews, the experience has 23 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 23 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 5 |
|
22% |
| 9/10 | 7 |
|
30% |
| 8/10 | 7 |
|
30% |
| 7/10 | 4 |
|
17% |
| 6/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 5/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
85.65% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Kea Point Walk face-to-face reviews is 85.65% and is based on 23 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
82.61%
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 | Face-to-Face | Weight | Relative Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| David Horley | 8/10 | 1004 days | 6.0 | 100% | |
| Clotilde Graziani | 8/10 | 1321 days |  |
4.38 | 72% |
| Verena Konetzhi | 8/10 | 1330 days | |
4.37 | 71% |
| Horitz | 8/10 | 1337 days | |
4.36 | 71% |
| Sandrine | 7/10 | 1345 days | |
4.16 | 68% |
| Peter Hodgson | 9/10 | 1358 days | |
4.55 | 75% |
| Jesse Farrell | 8/10 | 2123 days | |
3.08 | 49% |
| Soizic | 9/10 | 2406 days | |
2.76 | 43% |
| Glenn Surzur | 7/10 | 2416 days | |
2.49 | 39% |
| Loesje | 7/10 | 2479 days | 2.39 | 37% | |
| Oliver Kalmbach | 9/10 | 2519 days | |
2.56 | 40% |
| Matthias Angela | 8/10 | 2779 days | |
2.01 | 30% |
| Gronewold Harm-Dierchs | 10/10 | 3135 days | |
1.51 | 21% |
| Margit and Corein Groenevelt | 8/10 | 3137 days | |
1.43 | 20% |
| Robin Smith | 10/10 | 3137 days | |
1.5 | 21% |
| Chris | 10/10 | 3145 days | |
1.49 | 21% |
| Bas Geerts | 7/10 | 3172 days | |
1.31 | 18% |
| Robert Haidt | 10/10 | 3172 days | |
1.44 | 20% |
| Pam de Vos | 9/10 | 3175 days | |
1.44 | 20% |
| Peter G | 8/10 | 3510 days | |
0.82 | 9% |
| Yasmin Abrahams | 9/10 | 3518 days | |
0.85 | 10% |
| Lehmann | 7/10 | 3526 days | |
0.76 | 8% |
| Inga | 9/10 | 3542 days | |
0.81 | 9% |
| Uerilie Stolareh | 9/10 | 3619 days | |
0.68 | 7% |
| KarinS | 10/10 | 3843 days | |
0.29 | 0% |
Adjustments
No Adjustment
Several adjustments to the weighted average may be added to improve relevancy and credibility. Kea Point Walk does not meet the criteria for any of these adjustments to apply.
Final Ranking Score
83%
The final ranking score once rounding has been applied. This value is cached and recalculated each day. Therefore it may not be precisely accurate based on the other values presented.
If you have any questions or comments about our ranking score calculation please get in touch at info@rankers.co.nz.