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 Routeburn 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.
Routeburn Track
Valid Reviews
138 Valid Reviews
The Routeburn Track experience has a total of 139 reviews. There are 138 valid reviews that are included when calculating the ranking score and 1 invalid review 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 138 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 60 |
|
43% |
| 9/10 | 43 |
|
31% |
| 8/10 | 26 |
|
19% |
| 7/10 | 6 |
|
4% |
| 6/10 | 2 |
|
1% |
| 5/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
90.87% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Routeburn Track valid reviews is 90.87% and is based on 138 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
131 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 138 valid reviews, the experience has 131 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 131 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 55 |
|
42% |
| 9/10 | 42 |
|
32% |
| 8/10 | 25 |
|
19% |
| 7/10 | 6 |
|
5% |
| 6/10 | 2 |
|
2% |
| 5/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
90.61% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Routeburn Track face-to-face reviews is 90.61% and is based on 131 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
93.70%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chris | 10/10 | 927 days | 100% |
| Jan Christoph | 10/10 | 3267 days | 4% |
| Dorothy and Graham Glen | 10/10 | 3267 days | 4% |
| Laura Kudo | 8/10 | 3492 days | 3% |
| Melanie and Pascal | 10/10 | 3518 days | 3% |
| Remy and Rebecca Mans | 10/10 | 3521 days | 3% |
| Holloway | 10/10 | 3523 days | 3% |
| Fi | 8/10 | 3544 days | 3% |
| Simon | 10/10 | 3565 days | 3% |
| Mikkel Thomassen | 10/10 | 3616 days | 3% |
| Jannika Cao | 10/10 | 3616 days | 3% |
| Kat | 8/10 | 3617 days | 3% |
| Austin Jurgensmeyer | 10/10 | 3642 days | 2% |
| Susan H | 10/10 | 3659 days | 2% |
| Hector | 9/10 | 3847 days | 2% |
| Carlos | 9/10 | 3847 days | 2% |
| Ivanova R | 10/10 | 3848 days | 2% |
| Jenna Kuittinen | 7/10 | 3860 days | 2% |
| Stephen Timko | 10/10 | 3864 days | 2% |
| Jeeyoung Kim | 10/10 | 3866 days | 2% |
| Marie | 10/10 | 3868 days | 2% |
| Szu-Yi Hsu | 8/10 | 3870 days | 2% |
| Chao Lai | 9/10 | 3870 days | 2% |
| Virginia Fradin | 8/10 | 3870 days | 2% |
| Dominique | 10/10 | 3871 days | 2% |
| Derick Trotter | 9/10 | 3871 days | 2% |
| Kathryn Nolan | 10/10 | 3873 days | 2% |
| Molly Bogeberg | 10/10 | 3874 days | 2% |
| Pierre Mathis | 8/10 | 3876 days | 2% |
| Judy | 9/10 | 3878 days | 2% |
| Lea Kisbye | 7/10 | 3879 days | 1% |
| Max | 7/10 | 3881 days | 1% |
| Manuel El-Amine | 8/10 | 3882 days | 2% |
| Bernardo Galeazzo | 8/10 | 3886 days | 2% |
| Kim | 8/10 | 3890 days | 1% |
| Stephanie Pope | 9/10 | 3896 days | 1% |
| Maike Santelmann | 9/10 | 3898 days | 1% |
| Remi Lopez | 10/10 | 3899 days | 2% |
| Yarden Oliva | 10/10 | 3901 days | 1% |
| Mia Gaynor | 10/10 | 3902 days | 1% |
| Lisa | 8/10 | 3903 days | 1% |
| Gonne Clasen | 8/10 | 3923 days | 1% |
| Samantha Heim | 10/10 | 3952 days | 1% |
| Iker Peeters | 10/10 | 3971 days | 1% |
| Ixtaso Roncal | 10/10 | 4004 days | 1% |
| Sue Strebe | 8/10 | 4264 days | 0% |
| Elisa Felising | 10/10 | 4270 days | 0% |
| David McIntosh | 9/10 | 4281 days | 0% |
| Dawn Mulligan | 8/10 | 4287 days | 0% |
| Karolina Gren | 9/10 | 4580 days | 2% |
| Moritz Lepple | 9/10 | 4597 days | 2% |
| Simon Galpin | 8/10 | 4609 days | 2% |
| Andreas Jung | 9/10 | 4618 days | 2% |
| Maria = Moller Hansen | 10/10 | 4622 days | 2% |
| Bjorn Houlberg | 9/10 | 4622 days | 2% |
| Marinette | 9/10 | 4626 days | 2% |
| Barbara | 9/10 | 4626 days | 2% |
| Natalie Boehm | 10/10 | 4627 days | 2% |
| Guillaim Terrangle | 7/10 | 4627 days | 1% |
| Anna Guzewiez | 7/10 | 4630 days | 1% |
| David Krasner | 8/10 | 4636 days | 2% |
| Daryl | 10/10 | 4665 days | 2% |
| Trish Pope | 10/10 | 4674 days | 2% |
| Philipp Haass | 10/10 | 4679 days | 2% |
| Christin Woelk | 5/10 | 4940 days | 1% |
| Audrey Ripoche | 9/10 | 4952 days | 2% |
| Stientje van den Heuvel | 10/10 | 4962 days | 2% |
| Tom Somers | 10/10 | 4962 days | 2% |
| Andy Cummins | 10/10 | 4963 days | 2% |
| Cervenka Jaroslav | 10/10 | 4968 days | 2% |
| Jitka Zenahlikova | 10/10 | 4968 days | 2% |
| Katey Justice | 9/10 | 4971 days | 2% |
| Kathryn Pisco | 10/10 | 4982 days | 2% |
| Mike Pisco | 10/10 | 4982 days | 2% |
| Patrick O'Connell | 10/10 | 4986 days | 2% |
| Helen and Ogi | 10/10 | 4989 days | 2% |
| Francis Runge | 10/10 | 4990 days | 2% |
| Peter Moederer | 8/10 | 4993 days | 2% |
| Tobias Sowade | 9/10 | 5002 days | 2% |
| Liam Day | 8/10 | 5052 days | 2% |
| Alexandra van den Brack | 9/10 | 5063 days | 2% |
| Katharina Pape | 9/10 | 5064 days | 2% |
| Debbie | 10/10 | 5067 days | 2% |
| Michael Neumann | 10/10 | 5328 days | 2% |
| Oliver Hardt | 8/10 | 5330 days | 2% |
| Val Phillips | 10/10 | 5334 days | 2% |
| D Esson | 8/10 | 5335 days | 2% |
| Hanna Clement | 8/10 | 5335 days | 2% |
| Keith Helen | 10/10 | 5341 days | 2% |
| Fleming Lauridsen | 9/10 | 5350 days | 2% |
| Siegfried Richter | 8/10 | 5351 days | 2% |
| Beeny | 9/10 | 5351 days | 2% |
| Carolin Haas | 9/10 | 5351 days | 2% |
| Vincent & Lian | 9/10 | 5351 days | 2% |
| Alan Findlay | 10/10 | 5356 days | 2% |
| Lynn Robinson | 10/10 | 5362 days | 2% |
| Francis Corrigan | 10/10 | 5371 days | 2% |
| Jackie & Ray | 9/10 | 5383 days | 2% |
| Alex | 10/10 | 5401 days | 2% |
| Rob O'Neill | 9/10 | 5678 days | 2% |
| David Brown | 9/10 | 5680 days | 2% |
| David Taylor | 6/10 | 5681 days | 1% |
| R Tearle | 9/10 | 5685 days | 2% |
| Helen Evans | 6/10 | 5690 days | 1% |
| Helen | 9/10 | 5697 days | 2% |
| Katherine and Pete Smal | 9/10 | 5697 days | 2% |
| Wouter Moui | 8/10 | 5699 days | 2% |
| Ben Akin-Smith | 7/10 | 5701 days | 1% |
| K & J Overton | 9/10 | 5701 days | 2% |
| Estel la Prado | 9/10 | 5701 days | 2% |
| Elise van Haastert | 9/10 | 5706 days | 2% |
| Geert Van Tittelboom | 9/10 | 5711 days | 2% |
| Carmel | 10/10 | 5711 days | 2% |
| Janine Diehl | 10/10 | 5712 days | 2% |
| Daniel Hammersley | 9/10 | 5712 days | 2% |
| Becky Foley | 10/10 | 5721 days | 2% |
| Van den Borne | 9/10 | 5721 days | 2% |
| Angela Clarke | 9/10 | 5722 days | 2% |
| Liz Foxwell-Canning | 10/10 | 5722 days | 2% |
| Nataly Loewidt | 9/10 | 5727 days | 2% |
| Sue Haward | 9/10 | 5730 days | 2% |
| Christian Foerster | 9/10 | 5735 days | 2% |
| dollimyxture | 10/10 | 5766 days | 2% |
| mnm | 9/10 | 5766 days | 2% |
| Ann Michle | 9/10 | 5992 days | 2% |
| Victoria Slater | 8/10 | 6046 days | 2% |
| Margie | 10/10 | 6050 days | 2% |
| Inbar Yizhar Barnea | 10/10 | 6060 days | 2% |
| Graeme + Jane Ryan | 10/10 | 6062 days | 2% |
| Peter Brown | 8/10 | 6068 days | 2% |
| David Hobson | 10/10 | 6092 days | 2% |
| Ross & Catherine Litherland | 8/10 | 6113 days | 2% |
| Primavesi | 10/10 | 6174 days | 2% |
| Tim_P | 8/10 | 6403 days | 2% |
| Thomas1646 | 10/10 | 6413 days | 2% |
| JuergenSchnitzer | 10/10 | 6422 days | 2% |
| Gillian | 9/10 | 6426 days | 2% |
| Mette | 9/10 | 6450 days | 2% |
Adjustments
No Adjustment
Several adjustments to the weighted average may be added to improve relevancy and credibility. Routeburn Track does not meet the criteria for any of these adjustments to apply.
Balancing Adjustment
0.56% 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
94%
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.