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 Huka Falls Walkway.
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.
Huka Falls Walkway
Valid Reviews
139 Valid Reviews
The Huka Falls Walkway experience has a total of 140 reviews. There are 139 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 139 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 42 |
|
30% |
| 9/10 | 33 |
|
24% |
| 8/10 | 38 |
|
27% |
| 7/10 | 20 |
|
14% |
| 6/10 | 6 |
|
4% |
| 5/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
86.12% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Huka Falls Walkway valid reviews is 86.12% and is based on 139 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
128 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 139 valid reviews, the experience has 128 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 128 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 37 |
|
29% |
| 9/10 | 28 |
|
22% |
| 8/10 | 37 |
|
29% |
| 7/10 | 20 |
|
16% |
| 6/10 | 6 |
|
5% |
| 5/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
85.47% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Huka Falls Walkway face-to-face reviews is 85.47% and is based on 128 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
90.32%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mike Fricker | 10/10 | 863 days | 100% |
| Mike Fricker | 10/10 | 2932 days | 4% |
| Amy Lord | 7/10 | 3151 days | 3% |
| Liane Bausch | 8/10 | 3247 days | 2% |
| Julien Turpin | 10/10 | 3320 days | 2% |
| Michel and Susanne | 10/10 | 3491 days | 2% |
| Tim Fassbender | 9/10 | 3529 days | 2% |
| Saskia Schug | 8/10 | 3570 days | 1% |
| Felicity Ford | 8/10 | 3572 days | 1% |
| Lucy Millett | 7/10 | 3577 days | 1% |
| Megan Telford | 8/10 | 3577 days | 1% |
| Alice Frater | 9/10 | 3584 days | 1% |
| Jack Robinson | 10/10 | 3596 days | 1% |
| Sylvain Schiber | 9/10 | 3601 days | 1% |
| Elizabeth Braidotti | 10/10 | 3668 days | 1% |
| Sebastiaan | 7/10 | 3837 days | 0% |
| Andrea Tabaka | 10/10 | 3863 days | 0% |
| Natasha Harbinson | 6/10 | 3864 days | 0% |
| Melissa Fuster | 7/10 | 3887 days | 0% |
| Iris Kerbler | 7/10 | 3890 days | 0% |
| Thomas Werner | 6/10 | 3894 days | 0% |
| Vanesha Patel | 9/10 | 3898 days | 0% |
| gita feichtingerova | 10/10 | 3923 days | 0% |
| Caro G | 9/10 | 3972 days | 0% |
| Fiona Hawkins | 8/10 | 4539 days | 0% |
| Luisa Bach | 9/10 | 4593 days | 0% |
| Jesseca Klausch | 7/10 | 4603 days | 0% |
| Vincent Schaeflier | 9/10 | 4603 days | 0% |
| Romina Bolz | 7/10 | 4641 days | 0% |
| Elodie and jo | 10/10 | 4965 days | 0% |
| Lauret Stulemeyer | 9/10 | 5020 days | 0% |
| Jan Sjoerdtje | 9/10 | 5023 days | 0% |
| Pietersen | 8/10 | 5043 days | 0% |
| Julia Ramseier | 10/10 | 5044 days | 0% |
| James Darren Tennant | 8/10 | 5044 days | 0% |
| Martina Posch | 10/10 | 5046 days | 0% |
| Lisa Blake | 6/10 | 5048 days | 0% |
| Christop Isabella | 10/10 | 5295 days | 0% |
| Jens Moller | 7/10 | 5300 days | 0% |
| Peter Hart | 9/10 | 5304 days | 0% |
| Tim Germany | 9/10 | 5307 days | 0% |
| Dick Stewart | 6/10 | 5312 days | 0% |
| Lisa Ruhfus | 9/10 | 5316 days | 0% |
| Geoffrey Kuppens | 10/10 | 5316 days | 0% |
| Anglea de Smit | 8/10 | 5318 days | 0% |
| Moritz | 9/10 | 5320 days | 0% |
| Elise Violet | 7/10 | 5320 days | 0% |
| Rachel | 9/10 | 5321 days | 0% |
| Farid Juillot | 8/10 | 5321 days | 0% |
| Simon Fry | 8/10 | 5321 days | 0% |
| Andy Bridgman | 8/10 | 5321 days | 0% |
| Marilyn Mobley | 10/10 | 5322 days | 0% |
| Graham Swinyard | 9/10 | 5330 days | 0% |
| Samplonius | 9/10 | 5331 days | 0% |
| Adam Critchley | 8/10 | 5333 days | 0% |
| Corv V D Hof | 8/10 | 5333 days | 0% |
| Dugald McCallum | 10/10 | 5335 days | 0% |
| Peter Broosder | 7/10 | 5397 days | 0% |
| Annie | 10/10 | 5398 days | 0% |
| Kevin & Chris | 10/10 | 5405 days | 0% |
| Konny | 10/10 | 5414 days | 0% |
| Lardy | 7/10 | 5415 days | 0% |
| R & M Willows | 10/10 | 5415 days | 0% |
| twiddi | 9/10 | 5642 days | 0% |
| Zoe Barker | 9/10 | 5647 days | 0% |
| Alice Bastiman | 8/10 | 5650 days | 0% |
| Natalie Maguire | 7/10 | 5656 days | 0% |
| Harald Schmidt | 8/10 | 5658 days | 0% |
| Guy Cohen | 10/10 | 5659 days | 0% |
| Birgette Lindved | 10/10 | 5662 days | 0% |
| Aimee Pollett | 8/10 | 5663 days | 0% |
| Nathalie Verzeletti | 8/10 | 5663 days | 0% |
| Steve Read | 8/10 | 5666 days | 0% |
| Julia Hofstetter | 8/10 | 5666 days | 0% |
| Diane Johnston | 9/10 | 5666 days | 0% |
| Faye Cox | 8/10 | 5671 days | 0% |
| Rachel Kent-Lawton | 10/10 | 5673 days | 0% |
| Pieter & Annelies | 7/10 | 5675 days | 0% |
| Ronald Lippett | 8/10 | 5678 days | 0% |
| Kurmann/Kayser | 10/10 | 5679 days | 0% |
| Birgette Weiner | 8/10 | 5687 days | 0% |
| Tayler Gray | 9/10 | 5688 days | 0% |
| Petersen | 10/10 | 5694 days | 0% |
| TheBigLebowski | 9/10 | 5732 days | 0% |
| Matt | 10/10 | 5786 days | 0% |
| Andrew Hammond | 9/10 | 5824 days | 0% |
| K_and_K | 8/10 | 5885 days | 0% |
| Kurt | 8/10 | 5971 days | 0% |
| uceil | 9/10 | 5986 days | 0% |
| Family_Thomsen | 10/10 | 6020 days | 0% |
| Gerhard Kronen | 8/10 | 6035 days | 0% |
| Mary | 7/10 | 6040 days | 0% |
| Cecile | 9/10 | 6041 days | 0% |
| Evelien Thijs | 8/10 | 6045 days | 0% |
| Elisabeth Egerup | 10/10 | 6045 days | 0% |
| Maria Lorentzen | 7/10 | 6045 days | 0% |
| Luisa | 8/10 | 6048 days | 0% |
| Mark | 10/10 | 6057 days | 0% |
| Josy | 10/10 | 6058 days | 0% |
| Tanja Titze | 10/10 | 6059 days | 0% |
| Hannah Clark | 10/10 | 6059 days | 0% |
| Nikki Wood | 10/10 | 6060 days | 0% |
| Lisa Beauchemin | 9/10 | 6061 days | 0% |
| Helen Power | 8/10 | 6061 days | 0% |
| Bryan Keddie | 10/10 | 6062 days | 0% |
| Susan | 10/10 | 6062 days | 0% |
| Brenda | 8/10 | 6063 days | 0% |
| Eva | 8/10 | 6064 days | 0% |
| Yvonne Ing | 10/10 | 6065 days | 0% |
| Coby Aalbrecht | 6/10 | 6065 days | 0% |
| John-Paul | 10/10 | 6066 days | 0% |
| Wolfgang G | 9/10 | 6072 days | 0% |
| Veltmaat NL | 7/10 | 6072 days | 0% |
| Chris Kevin | 7/10 | 6075 days | 0% |
| Douglas Kirby | 8/10 | 6079 days | 0% |
| deanlaw | 9/10 | 6111 days | 0% |
| joannaw | 10/10 | 6113 days | 0% |
| varenaee | 9/10 | 6113 days | 0% |
| Anne Ford | 7/10 | 6130 days | 0% |
| Stefan Lua | 9/10 | 6130 days | 0% |
| Lesley Nixon | 7/10 | 6138 days | 0% |
| Sena | 10/10 | 6138 days | 0% |
| Stefanie Micheler | 10/10 | 6139 days | 0% |
| Hennie Neeleman | 8/10 | 6140 days | 0% |
| Hans Barth | 8/10 | 6148 days | 0% |
| Dimitry Zonnet | 8/10 | 6154 days | 0% |
| emmah | 7/10 | 6255 days | 0% |
| EvertG | 9/10 | 6353 days | 0% |
| Michael Maddams | 8/10 | 6370 days | 0% |
| arthurwa | 10/10 | 6372 days | 0% |
| gerhardm | 10/10 | 6372 days | 0% |
| Kaye | 9/10 | 6372 days | 0% |
| Jake1 | 8/10 | 6374 days | 0% |
| DaveV | 8/10 | 6388 days | 0% |
| Falk | 6/10 | 6388 days | 0% |
| WiebkeS | 8/10 | 6388 days | 0% |
| LosItaly | 9/10 | 6389 days | 0% |
| TsjerkJ | 9/10 | 6390 days | 0% |
| BrendaM | 10/10 | 6753 days | 0% |
Adjustments
No Adjustment
Several adjustments to the weighted average may be added to improve relevancy and credibility. Huka Falls Walkway does not meet the criteria for any of these adjustments to apply.
Balancing Adjustment
0.96% 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
91%
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.