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 CharterLink.
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.
CharterLink
Valid Reviews
67 Valid Reviews
The CharterLink experience has a total of 67 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.
Within these 67 valid reviews, the experience has 3 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 67 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 49 |
|
73% |
| 9/10 | 15 |
|
22% |
| 8/10 | 3 |
|
4% |
| 7/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 6/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 5/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
96.87% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the CharterLink valid reviews is 96.87% and is based on 67 valid reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here as a comparison to the weighted average.
Weighted Average
96.96%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Val Mackie | 10/10 | 3863 days | 100% |
| steve cooper | 10/10 | 4138 days | 25% |
| Myles Henaghan | 9/10 | 4138 days | 24% |
| David Jones | 9/10 | 4169 days | 16% |
| lisa Mackay | 10/10 | 4228 days | 0% |
| Steve Barham | 10/10 | 4228 days | 0% |
| Karl Risch | 10/10 | 4228 days | 0% |
| James Mackenzie | 9/10 | 4535 days | 97% |
| Stu Thomas | 10/10 | 4535 days | 98% |
| Eric Sinton | 10/10 | 4563 days | 98% |
| Johannes Markus | 9/10 | 4592 days | 42% |
| Peter Haarhaus | 10/10 | 4594 days | 98% |
| Tina Hejrskov | 10/10 | 4594 days | 98% |
| Lynette Ashby | 10/10 | 4594 days | 98% |
| Andy Campbell | 8/10 | 4594 days | 96% |
| Matt A | 10/10 | 4594 days | 98% |
| suzanne_b | 9/10 | 4625 days | 97% |
| simon_k | 8/10 | 4900 days | 96% |
| greg payne | 9/10 | 4900 days | 97% |
| Peter Trezise | 10/10 | 4900 days | 98% |
| Brian Walsh | 9/10 | 4900 days | 97% |
| Suzib23 | 10/10 | 4959 days | 98% |
| Chris Rackham | 10/10 | 4959 days | 98% |
| Roger Richardson | 10/10 | 4959 days | 98% |
| grudels | 10/10 | 4959 days | 98% |
| Shane Armstrong | 10/10 | 4959 days | 98% |
| Fraser_Hurrell | 10/10 | 4990 days | 98% |
| lonetelemarker | 10/10 | 5112 days | 98% |
| JaredL | 10/10 | 5234 days | 98% |
| HyattBrowns | 10/10 | 5234 days | 98% |
| brahms | 10/10 | 5265 days | 98% |
| BrentWW | 10/10 | 5265 days | 98% |
| paul_thompson_nz | 9/10 | 5265 days | 97% |
| wthomson | 9/10 | 5294 days | 97% |
| greg | 10/10 | 5294 days | 98% |
| geoffgage | 9/10 | 5294 days | 97% |
| Adam Clatworthy | 10/10 | 5631 days | 98% |
| Frazer | 10/10 | 5631 days | 98% |
| Warwick_M | 9/10 | 5631 days | 97% |
| ziemkes | 10/10 | 5659 days | 98% |
| mark_elley | 10/10 | 5690 days | 98% |
| NickC | 10/10 | 5690 days | 98% |
| boycejw | 10/10 | 5690 days | 98% |
| OKRobbo | 10/10 | 5690 days | 98% |
| LOUIS485 | 10/10 | 5721 days | 98% |
| Craig_Climo | 10/10 | 5935 days | 98% |
| Chris Renall | 10/10 | 5965 days | 98% |
| MedaryB | 9/10 | 5965 days | 97% |
| Jakped | 10/10 | 5965 days | 98% |
| JohnWOLFF | 8/10 | 5965 days | 96% |
| Christina Martin | 10/10 | 5996 days | 98% |
| Chris Shirley | 10/10 | 5996 days | 98% |
| Eric Sinton | 10/10 | 5996 days | 98% |
| noelburns | 10/10 | 5996 days | 98% |
| machonchon | 10/10 | 6024 days | 98% |
| pbutterworth | 10/10 | 6024 days | 98% |
| hendrik gottschalk | 10/10 | 6055 days | 98% |
| Gareth Ayre | 10/10 | 6055 days | 98% |
| gemmav | 9/10 | 6070 days | 42% |
| brampa | 10/10 | 6147 days | 98% |
| Stiernacken | 10/10 | 6300 days | 98% |
| Goodman | 9/10 | 6300 days | 97% |
| Jim_001 | 10/10 | 6341 days | 43% |
| Childers | 10/10 | 6342 days | 98% |
| hauraki | 10/10 | 6344 days | 98% |
| johnhargs30 | 9/10 | 6361 days | 97% |
| Kate Bilham | 10/10 | 6361 days | 98% |
Adjustments
Several adjustments to the weighted average are added to improve relevancy and credibility. These adjustments apply equally to all experiences that meet the criteria.
Sample Size Adjustment
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 CharterLink experience has plenty of reviews and does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
Recent Reviews Adjustment
-2.09% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 123 days. However the CharterLink 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 CharterLink experience has been adjusted for 200 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 197 | -2.06% |
| 198 | -2.07% |
| 199 | -2.08% |
| 200 | -2.09% |
| 201 | -2.10% |
| 202 | -2.12% |
| 203 | -2.13% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
0.45% 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.
Final Ranking Score
95%
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.