Ranking Score Explained

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 Mount / Mt Iron 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

Mount / Mt Iron Track

Valid Reviews

33 Valid Reviews

The Mount / Mt Iron 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 6
18%
9/10 9
27%
8/10 10
30%
7/10 7
21%
6/10 1
3%
5/10 0
0%
4/10 0
0%
3/10 0
0%
2/10 0
0%
1/10 0
0%

83.64% Average

The raw data average (mean) for all the Mount / Mt Iron Track valid reviews is 83.64% 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

27 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 27 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.

Below is the distribution of ratings for the 27 face-to-face reviews:

Rating Count Percentage
10/10 4
15%
9/10 6
22%
8/10 9
33%
7/10 7
26%
6/10 1
4%
5/10 0
0%
4/10 0
0%
3/10 0
0%
2/10 0
0%
1/10 0
0%

81.85% Average

The raw data average (mean) for all the Mount / Mt Iron Track face-to-face reviews is 81.85% and is based on 27 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.

Weighted Average

82.94%

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
Fabian Probst 7/10 3330 days 92%
Myriam Ackermann 8/10 3330 days 100%
Sarah Horley 8/10 3342 days 98%
Emma Millett 8/10 3347 days 98%
Ane Pujol 9/10 3377 days 95%
Anthony Terry 7/10 3394 days 84%
Susanne 7/10 3394 days 84%
Maura O'Connell 10/10 3432 days 88%
Victoria Wells 9/10 3446 days 85%
Michelle O'Regen 10/10 3630 days 59%
Florence 6/10 3660 days 40%
Riviere 7/10 3673 days 45%
Geoffrey Coulon 7/10 3737 days 36%
Ahmed Mohsen Aly 8/10 3782 days 34%
Mak Walther 9/10 4017 days 1%
Oliver Pester 10/10 4027 days 0%
Craig Jones 9/10 4848 days 23%
Dio 8/10 4850 days 22%
Tinne Cis 8/10 5120 days 22%
Sarah Graham 8/10 5230 days 22%
Marilyn Buboltz 9/10 5481 days 23%
Eva Soerensen 8/10 5490 days 22%
John Hensman 8/10 5493 days 22%
Mary Van 9/10 5670 days 23%
katrina Marshall 10/10 5840 days 23%
Bowness 9/10 5841 days 23%
Ashley Arnold 9/10 5858 days 23%
Hannah Clark 10/10 5875 days 23%
Bouwma 7/10 5875 days 18%
KimC 8/10 6186 days 22%
Lisa Duin 7/10 6186 days 18%
ginekek 9/10 6188 days 23%
JohannaB 10/10 6207 days 23%

Adjustments

No Adjustment

Several adjustments to the weighted average may be added to improve relevancy and credibility. Mount / Mt Iron Track does not meet the criteria for any of these adjustments to apply.

Balancing Adjustment

2.26% 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

85%

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.