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 Milford 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.
Milford Track
Valid Reviews
70 Valid Reviews
The Milford Track experience has a total of 72 reviews. There are 70 valid reviews that are included when calculating the ranking score and 2 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 70 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 29 |
|
41% |
| 9/10 | 22 |
|
31% |
| 8/10 | 13 |
|
19% |
| 7/10 | 2 |
|
3% |
| 6/10 | 2 |
|
3% |
| 5/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 4/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
89.00% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Milford Track valid reviews is 89.00% and is based on 70 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
66 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 70 valid reviews, the experience has 66 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 66 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 26 |
|
39% |
| 9/10 | 22 |
|
33% |
| 8/10 | 12 |
|
18% |
| 7/10 | 2 |
|
3% |
| 6/10 | 2 |
|
3% |
| 5/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 4/10 | 1 |
|
2% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 1 |
|
2% |
88.64% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Milford Track face-to-face reviews is 88.64% and is based on 66 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
91.67%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ben H | 10/10 | 595 days | 44.62 | 100% | |
| Julian Kihnle | 10/10 | 713 days |  |
28.12 | 63% |
| Tom | 10/10 | 960 days | |
7.89 | 18% |
| Carly Biedul | 8/10 | 997 days | |
6.2 | 14% |
| Rhydian Templer | 10/10 | 1029 days | |
5.69 | 13% |
| Sian Templer | 9/10 | 1029 days | |
5.69 | 13% |
| Jade Templer | 10/10 | 1029 days | |
5.69 | 13% |
| Jolien | 9/10 | 1039 days | |
5.5 | 12% |
| Rebecca Holmes | 9/10 | 1040 days | |
5.48 | 12% |
| Marc Sanivan | 7/10 | 1041 days | |
4.97 | 11% |
| Nick Lancy | 9/10 | 1324 days | |
4.61 | 10% |
| Stephanie Pope | 9/10 | 1341 days | |
4.58 | 10% |
| Mia Gaynor | 10/10 | 1347 days | |
4.57 | 10% |
| Alexis Leneveu | 8/10 | 1757 days | 3.67 | 8% | |
| Fanny DeBon | 8/10 | 1779 days | |
3.64 | 8% |
| Antoine Vernay | 6/10 | 1786 days | |
3.17 | 7% |
| Hadar | 1/10 | 2060 days | |
2.44 | 5% |
| Juliane | 8/10 | 2068 days | |
3.17 | 7% |
| Lopez Anandine | 9/10 | 2073 days | |
3.33 | 7% |
| Thomas Zilio | 9/10 | 2073 days | |
3.33 | 7% |
| Gilad Itzkovitz | 6/10 | 2104 days | |
2.72 | 6% |
| Alex | 10/10 | 2115 days | 3.25 | 7% | |
| Evyatar Karni | 10/10 | 2118 days | |
3.25 | 7% |
| Pete Wilson | 4/10 | 2407 days | |
2.18 | 5% |
| Michal | 10/10 | 2425 days | |
2.72 | 6% |
| Armand Poulain | 8/10 | 2427 days | |
2.58 | 6% |
| Colin and Raewyn Newton | 8/10 | 2435 days | |
2.57 | 6% |
| Tobias Sowade | 8/10 | 2449 days | |
2.55 | 6% |
| Jessica Tilly | 8/10 | 2761 days | |
2.04 | 4% |
| Alan Brady | 10/10 | 2783 days | |
2.11 | 5% |
| Tinne Cis | 10/10 | 2783 days | |
2.11 | 5% |
| Fabian Germar | 9/10 | 2791 days | |
2.1 | 5% |
| Robert & Bridget Holden | 10/10 | 2795 days | |
2.09 | 5% |
| S & J McDonald | 8/10 | 2796 days | |
1.98 | 4% |
| John & Ray Calder | 8/10 | 2798 days | |
1.98 | 4% |
| Katrawa | 9/10 | 2808 days | |
2.07 | 4% |
| Anna Bret | 9/10 | 2886 days | |
1.93 | 4% |
| Jaime Castells | 10/10 | 2886 days | |
1.93 | 4% |
| Alita Smith | 9/10 | 3124 days | |
1.53 | 3% |
| David Brown | 10/10 | 3125 days | |
1.52 | 3% |
| R Tearle | 9/10 | 3130 days | |
1.52 | 3% |
| Jorge Martinez Gacio | 9/10 | 3132 days | |
1.51 | 3% |
| Phil Smith | 10/10 | 3136 days | |
1.51 | 3% |
| Marquardt and Bernd | 10/10 | 3138 days | |
1.5 | 3% |
| David and Karen | 9/10 | 3144 days | |
1.49 | 3% |
| Richard Broughton | 10/10 | 3146 days | |
1.49 | 3% |
| Susan Herd | 9/10 | 3147 days | |
1.49 | 3% |
| Jol Balder | 8/10 | 3168 days | |
1.38 | 3% |
| Amanda Craig | 10/10 | 3174 days | |
1.44 | 3% |
| Dr Dorthe Bossow | 10/10 | 3176 days | |
1.44 | 3% |
| JudyandAndre | 10/10 | 3211 days | 1.38 | 3% | |
| Monica Askew | 10/10 | 3434 days | |
0.99 | 2% |
| Darrell & Michelle Lamb | 9/10 | 3434 days | |
0.99 | 2% |
| Kevin & Chris | 10/10 | 3450 days | |
0.97 | 2% |
| Ian Tainsh | 10/10 | 3499 days | |
0.88 | 2% |
| Einar | 9/10 | 3505 days | |
0.87 | 2% |
| Angela | 7/10 | 3518 days | |
0.77 | 2% |
| Wielink | 9/10 | 3525 days | |
0.84 | 2% |
| Lynette Sal | 10/10 | 3561 days | |
0.78 | 2% |
| Bill Nash | 9/10 | 3611 days | |
0.69 | 1% |
| Lindsay Brown | 10/10 | 3617 days | |
0.68 | 1% |
| Sena | 8/10 | 3617 days | |
0.65 | 1% |
| X Vogel | 10/10 | 3617 days | |
0.68 | 1% |
| Peter and Dianne McKinnon | 10/10 | 3630 days | |
0.66 | 1% |
| SophieC | 9/10 | 3846 days | |
0.29 | 1% |
| Wight | 10/10 | 3849 days | |
0.28 | 0% |
| Viktoria Stoffel | 9/10 | 3858 days | |
0.27 | 0% |
| Joel | 9/10 | 3871 days | |
0.25 | 0% |
| Dianne | 8/10 | 3960 days | |
0.09 | 0% |
| Rebekka | 10/10 | 3978 days | |
0.06 | 0% |
Adjustments
No Adjustment
Several adjustments to the weighted average may be added to improve relevancy and credibility. Milford Track does not meet the criteria for any of these adjustments to apply.
Final Ranking Score
92%
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.