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
88.82%
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 | 455 days | 67.19 | 100% | |
| Linnea Sahlberg | 10/10 | 864 days |  |
13.46 | 20% |
| Kati Behrendt | 10/10 | 1123 days | 4.95 | 7% | |
| Julia Achatz | 7/10 | 1125 days | |
4.5 | 7% |
| Markus Wagner | 9/10 | 1125 days | |
4.94 | 7% |
| Katharina Gans | 9/10 | 1133 days | |
4.93 | 7% |
| Benedikt Lorenz | 10/10 | 1135 days | |
4.92 | 7% |
| Jonas Neumann | 9/10 | 1138 days | |
4.92 | 7% |
| Theresa Flach | 10/10 | 1138 days | |
4.92 | 7% |
| Daniela Hintermayr | 7/10 | 1139 days | |
4.47 | 7% |
| Thomas Klinting | 6/10 | 1139 days | |
4.08 | 6% |
| Wouter Bleckmann | 8/10 | 1173 days | |
4.6 | 7% |
| Tom Rogers | 7/10 | 1187 days | |
4.39 | 7% |
| Ulf | 10/10 | 1199 days | |
4.8 | 7% |
| Jack Robinson | 10/10 | 1210 days | |
4.77 | 7% |
| Robert Elzinga | 8/10 | 1440 days | |
4.11 | 6% |
| David Schelensky | 10/10 | 1489 days | |
4.23 | 6% |
| Ruven Rintelmann | 9/10 | 1490 days | |
4.23 | 6% |
| Daniel Roedel | 8/10 | 1498 days | 4.0 | 6% | |
| Catherine Schlachter | 9/10 | 2166 days | |
2.9 | 4% |
| Christina Perez | 8/10 | 2166 days | |
2.76 | 4% |
| Casandra Prunica | 9/10 | 2193 days | |
2.85 | 4% |
| Janina Zwerver | 8/10 | 2193 days | |
2.71 | 4% |
| Anton Thisted | 7/10 | 2523 days | |
2.01 | 3% |
| Chantal Mortel | 8/10 | 2561 days | |
2.02 | 3% |
| Soren and Inelase Lindhardbell | 10/10 | 2628 days | |
2.0 | 3% |
| Soren and Inelase Lindhardbell | 10/10 | 2628 days | |
2.0 | 3% |
| Brigitte | 9/10 | 2634 days | |
1.99 | 3% |
| Ron | 8/10 | 2650 days | |
1.86 | 3% |
| Laurits and Bettina | 9/10 | 2653 days | |
1.95 | 3% |
| Kerstin | 9/10 | 2661 days | |
1.94 | 3% |
| Helmut Schmid | 9/10 | 2915 days | |
1.44 | 2% |
| Melinda Moir | 9/10 | 2927 days | |
1.41 | 2% |
| Lars | 8/10 | 2930 days | |
1.34 | 2% |
| Lotte Foged | 9/10 | 2948 days | |
1.37 | 2% |
| Dean | 8/10 | 2996 days | |
1.22 | 2% |
| Lisa Beutler | 10/10 | 3001 days | |
1.27 | 2% |
| Barry Dunster | 10/10 | 3012 days | 1.25 | 2% | |
| Rudy Witt | 8/10 | 3028 days | |
1.16 | 2% |
| Tina | 9/10 | 3042 days | |
1.19 | 2% |
| Ralph & Marloes Meyers | 9/10 | 3255 days | |
0.77 | 1% |
| Wheeler | 10/10 | 3276 days | |
0.73 | 1% |
| Michael Orme | 7/10 | 3277 days | |
0.66 | 1% |
| Tim | 9/10 | 3277 days | |
0.73 | 1% |
| Tina Baun | 8/10 | 3279 days | |
0.69 | 1% |
| Erica Moorhouse | 8/10 | 3292 days | |
0.67 | 1% |
| Dennis & Claudia | 8/10 | 3307 days | |
0.64 | 1% |
| Florian | 7/10 | 3308 days | |
0.61 | 1% |
| D Oostrum | 9/10 | 3310 days | |
0.67 | 1% |
| Mike Peirce | 9/10 | 3646 days | |
0.01 | 0% |
| Cecile | 10/10 | 3655 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| Jannievan Osnabrugge | 7/10 | 3662 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| Lousie Hug | 7/10 | 3666 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| Schubert, Wolfgang & Claudia | 8/10 | 3685 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| ilkal | 8/10 | 3728 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| katesc | 9/10 | 3731 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| usigmund | 8/10 | 3731 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| vernenal | 10/10 | 3746 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| Bue Verrept | 8/10 | 3749 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| Monika Wenzel | 10/10 | 3750 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| Louis Duhaime | 9/10 | 3753 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| Jeanette Larsen | 9/10 | 3754 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| johannac | 8/10 | 3861 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| BVanW | 9/10 | 3978 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| Ralph Boese | 10/10 | 4006 days | |
0.0 | 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.