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 Taranaki Falls.
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.
Taranaki Falls
Valid Reviews
65 Valid Reviews
The Taranaki Falls experience has a total of 65 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 65 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 16 |
|
25% |
| 9/10 | 22 |
|
34% |
| 8/10 | 18 |
|
28% |
| 7/10 | 8 |
|
12% |
| 6/10 | 1 |
|
2% |
| 5/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
86.77% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Taranaki Falls valid reviews is 86.77% and is based on 65 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
61 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 65 valid reviews, the experience has 61 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 61 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 14 |
|
23% |
| 9/10 | 21 |
|
34% |
| 8/10 | 17 |
|
28% |
| 7/10 | 8 |
|
13% |
| 6/10 | 1 |
|
2% |
| 5/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
86.39% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Taranaki Falls face-to-face reviews is 86.39% and is based on 61 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
88.94%
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 | Face-to-Face | Weight | Relative Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dee Greig-Dunn | 9/10 | 266 days | 88.79 | 100% | |
| Linnea Sahlberg | 10/10 | 675 days |  |
32.95 | 37% |
| Kati Behrendt | 10/10 | 934 days | 9.11 | 9% | |
| Julia Achatz | 7/10 | 936 days | |
8.2 | 8% |
| Markus Wagner | 9/10 | 936 days | |
9.01 | 9% |
| Katharina Gans | 9/10 | 944 days | |
8.61 | 9% |
| Benedikt Lorenz | 10/10 | 946 days | |
8.52 | 9% |
| Jonas Neumann | 9/10 | 949 days | |
8.38 | 9% |
| Theresa Flach | 10/10 | 949 days | |
8.38 | 9% |
| Daniela Hintermayr | 7/10 | 950 days | |
7.58 | 8% |
| Thomas Klinting | 6/10 | 950 days | |
6.92 | 7% |
| Wouter Bleckmann | 8/10 | 984 days | |
6.6 | 7% |
| Tom Rogers | 7/10 | 998 days | |
5.91 | 6% |
| Ulf | 10/10 | 1010 days | |
6.14 | 6% |
| Jack Robinson | 10/10 | 1021 days | |
5.87 | 6% |
| Robert Elzinga | 8/10 | 1251 days | |
4.52 | 4% |
| David Schelensky | 10/10 | 1300 days | |
4.69 | 4% |
| Ruven Rintelmann | 9/10 | 1301 days | |
4.69 | 4% |
| Daniel Roedel | 8/10 | 1309 days | 4.44 | 4% | |
| Catherine Schlachter | 9/10 | 1977 days | |
3.66 | 3% |
| Christina Perez | 8/10 | 1977 days | |
3.47 | 3% |
| Casandra Prunica | 9/10 | 2004 days | |
3.62 | 3% |
| Janina Zwerver | 8/10 | 2004 days | |
3.44 | 3% |
| Anton Thisted | 7/10 | 2334 days | |
2.83 | 2% |
| Chantal Mortel | 8/10 | 2372 days | |
2.9 | 2% |
| Soren and Inelase Lindhardbell | 10/10 | 2439 days | |
2.95 | 2% |
| Soren and Inelase Lindhardbell | 10/10 | 2439 days | |
2.95 | 2% |
| Brigitte | 9/10 | 2445 days | |
2.95 | 2% |
| Ron | 8/10 | 2461 days | |
2.77 | 2% |
| Laurits and Bettina | 9/10 | 2464 days | |
2.92 | 2% |
| Kerstin | 9/10 | 2472 days | |
2.9 | 2% |
| Helmut Schmid | 9/10 | 2726 days | |
2.52 | 2% |
| Melinda Moir | 9/10 | 2738 days | |
2.5 | 2% |
| Lars | 8/10 | 2741 days | |
2.37 | 2% |
| Lotte Foged | 9/10 | 2759 days | |
2.47 | 2% |
| Dean | 8/10 | 2807 days | |
2.27 | 2% |
| Lisa Beutler | 10/10 | 2812 days | |
2.39 | 2% |
| Barry Dunster | 10/10 | 2823 days | 2.37 | 2% | |
| Rudy Witt | 8/10 | 2839 days | |
2.23 | 2% |
| Tina | 9/10 | 2853 days | |
2.32 | 2% |
| Ralph & Marloes Meyers | 9/10 | 3066 days | |
2.0 | 1% |
| Wheeler | 10/10 | 3087 days | |
1.97 | 1% |
| Michael Orme | 7/10 | 3088 days | |
1.79 | 1% |
| Tim | 9/10 | 3088 days | |
1.97 | 1% |
| Tina Baun | 8/10 | 3090 days | |
1.87 | 1% |
| Erica Moorhouse | 8/10 | 3103 days | |
1.85 | 1% |
| Dennis & Claudia | 8/10 | 3118 days | |
1.82 | 1% |
| Florian | 7/10 | 3119 days | |
1.75 | 1% |
| D Oostrum | 9/10 | 3121 days | |
1.92 | 1% |
| Mike Peirce | 9/10 | 3457 days | |
1.4 | 1% |
| Cecile | 10/10 | 3466 days | |
1.39 | 1% |
| Jannievan Osnabrugge | 7/10 | 3473 days | |
1.26 | 0% |
| Lousie Hug | 7/10 | 3477 days | |
1.25 | 0% |
| Schubert, Wolfgang & Claudia | 8/10 | 3496 days | |
1.28 | 0% |
| ilkal | 8/10 | 3539 days | |
1.22 | 0% |
| katesc | 9/10 | 3542 days | |
1.28 | 0% |
| usigmund | 8/10 | 3542 days | |
1.21 | 0% |
| vernenal | 10/10 | 3557 days | |
1.25 | 0% |
| Bue Verrept | 8/10 | 3560 days | |
1.19 | 0% |
| Monika Wenzel | 10/10 | 3561 days | |
1.25 | 0% |
| Louis Duhaime | 9/10 | 3564 days | |
1.24 | 0% |
| Jeanette Larsen | 9/10 | 3565 days | |
1.24 | 0% |
| johannac | 8/10 | 3672 days | |
1.02 | 0% |
| BVanW | 9/10 | 3789 days | |
0.9 | 0% |
| Ralph Boese | 10/10 | 3817 days | |
0.86 | 0% |
Adjustments
No Adjustment
Several adjustments to the weighted average may be added to improve relevancy and credibility. Taranaki Falls does not meet the criteria for any of these adjustments to apply.
Final Ranking Score
89%
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.