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 Harwoods Hole.
If you have any questions or comments about our ranking score calculation please get in touch at firstname.lastname@example.org. We don't believe this is perfect or complete so we're always interested in ways we might make improvements.
45 Valid Reviews
The Harwoods Hole experience has a total of 45 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 45 valid reviews:
The raw data average (mean) for all the Harwoods Hole valid reviews is 88.00% and is based on 45 valid reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here as a comparison to the weighted average.
39 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.
Within the 45 valid reviews, the experience has 39 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 39 face-to-face reviews:
The raw data average (mean) for all the Harwoods Hole face-to-face reviews is 88.21% and is based on 39 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
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.
|Sandra Marangi||9/10||832 days||19.15||100%|
|Matthias Wohlegamuth||7/10||832 days||19.15||100%|
|Anna Wooster||10/10||834 days||18.95||99%|
|Theo Macer||10/10||835 days||18.85||98%|
|Evelyn Rloeh||8/10||885 days||14.39||74%|
|Rulp Niet||9/10||885 days||14.39||74%|
|Eline-Jessica van der Hoeven||8/10||902 days||10.9||55%|
|Jenna Kuittinen||7/10||1128 days||5.95||28%|
|Jari Kahelin||7/10||1128 days||5.95||28%|
|Ellie Perkin||8/10||1133 days||5.94||28%|
|George Bellwood||9/10||1139 days||5.93||28%|
|Sarah Dorsett||10/10||1139 days||5.93||28%|
|Lauren Dinnage||9/10||1148 days||5.91||28%|
|Josh Symons||6/10||1155 days||5.9||28%|
|Ellen Holmgren||10/10||1156 days||5.9||28%|
|Natasha Harbinson||8/10||1166 days||5.88||28%|
|Anaelle Morand||9/10||1185 days||4.88||22%|
|Iris Kerbler||9/10||1192 days||5.84||27%|
|Thorbeu Scholz||9/10||1193 days||5.84||27%|
|Jitka and Matej||9/10||1221 days||5.79||27%|
|Max Brunner||9/10||1231 days||4.81||22%|
|Ron Web||10/10||1269 days||4.76||21%|
|Jan Suoboda||10/10||1734 days||4.95||22%|
|Anja Weppler||10/10||1846 days||4.77||21%|
|Friederike Kranzin||10/10||1886 days||4.7||21%|
|Elena Goschia||9/10||1905 days||4.67||21%|
|Jesse Flynn||10/10||1914 days||4.65||21%|
|kamil Benes||10/10||1935 days||4.62||21%|
|Anne Schneider||10/10||1943 days||4.61||21%|
|Janicha Blumenthal||10/10||2623 days||3.49||14%|
|Lillian van Wegen||8/10||2963 days||2.93||11%|
|Victor Lewis||8/10||2972 days||2.91||11%|
|Uwe Rieper||9/10||3367 days||2.27||8%|
|Tait Suridge||9/10||3441 days||2.14||7%|
|Vivienne O'Reilly||5/10||3453 days||2.12||7%|
|Mike Howe||8/10||4130 days||0.84||0%|
Several adjustments to the weighted average may be added to improve relevancy and credibility. Harwoods Hole does not meet the criteria for any of these adjustments to apply.
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 email@example.com.