Ranking Score Explained

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 Avalanche Peak track.

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.

Cymen Crick's avatar

Cymen Crick

Rankers Owner

Avalanche Peak track

Valid Reviews

33 Valid Reviews

The Avalanche Peak track experience has a total of 33 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 33 valid reviews:

Rating Count Percentage
10/10 16
48%
9/10 6
18%
8/10 7
21%
7/10 4
12%
6/10 0
0%
5/10 0
0%
4/10 0
0%
3/10 0
0%
2/10 0
0%
1/10 0
0%

90.30% Average

The raw data average (mean) for all the Avalanche Peak track valid reviews is 90.30% and is based on 33 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

31 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 33 valid reviews, the experience has 31 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.

Below is the distribution of ratings for the 31 face-to-face reviews:

Rating Count Percentage
10/10 14
45%
9/10 6
19%
8/10 7
23%
7/10 4
13%
6/10 0
0%
5/10 0
0%
4/10 0
0%
3/10 0
0%
2/10 0
0%
1/10 0
0%

89.68% Average

The raw data average (mean) for all the Avalanche Peak track face-to-face reviews is 89.68% and is based on 31 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.

Weighted Average

90.89%

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
Matthew Hall 10/10 2542 days 100%
Sandra Piechoua 10/10 2935 days 78%
Ramon Corbett 10/10 2954 days 77%
Wolfgang Ellenrieder 10/10 3179 days 64%
Daniel Weber 8/10 3191 days 62%
Munne 9/10 3214 days 61%
Isaliner and Mathieu 7/10 3216 days 57%
Jared and Evi 9/10 3258 days 59%
Sona 10/10 3580 days 41%
Martin Kroek 7/10 3605 days 37%
Stefanie 10/10 3904 days 23%
Jan-Peter Stripp 10/10 3904 days 23%
Simeon W 9/10 3918 days 22%
Jana Rutkowski 8/10 3922 days 22%
Dennis Philippi 8/10 3922 days 22%
Philip Schumann 10/10 3932 days 22%
Florent Bouillon 9/10 3933 days 21%
Vera Kreipe 10/10 3941 days 21%
Anouck Roudet 10/10 3957 days 20%
Mayan Goddat 10/10 3984 days 19%
Magdalene Zech 8/10 3985 days 18%
Marco Newald 10/10 3985 days 19%
Paul Liecke 10/10 4303 days 1%
Stella Thoben 10/10 4303 days 1%
Colin Webster 8/10 4312 days 0%
Peter Adams 7/10 4660 days 23%
R Straathof 9/10 4682 days 25%
Jo Meekley 8/10 5016 days 25%
Hadar Zevulun 8/10 5031 days 25%
Manfred Liuduer 9/10 5036 days 25%
Matthias A 10/10 5399 days 25%
Brenda 10/10 5423 days 25%
markus Kieper 7/10 5782 days 23%

Adjustments

No Adjustment

Several adjustments to the weighted average may be added to improve relevancy and credibility. Avalanche Peak track does not meet the criteria for any of these adjustments to apply.

Balancing Adjustment

0.88% 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

92%

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.