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
88.17%
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 | 658 days | 35.26 | 100% | |
| Linnea Sahlberg | 10/10 | 1067 days |  |
5.12 | 15% |
| Kati Behrendt | 10/10 | 1326 days | 4.55 | 13% | |
| Julia Achatz | 7/10 | 1328 days | |
4.14 | 12% |
| Markus Wagner | 9/10 | 1328 days | |
4.54 | 13% |
| Katharina Gans | 9/10 | 1336 days | |
4.53 | 13% |
| Benedikt Lorenz | 10/10 | 1338 days | |
4.52 | 13% |
| Jonas Neumann | 9/10 | 1341 days | |
4.52 | 13% |
| Theresa Flach | 10/10 | 1341 days | |
4.52 | 13% |
| Daniela Hintermayr | 7/10 | 1342 days | |
4.11 | 12% |
| Thomas Klinting | 6/10 | 1342 days | |
3.75 | 11% |
| Wouter Bleckmann | 8/10 | 1376 days | |
4.23 | 12% |
| Tom Rogers | 7/10 | 1390 days | |
4.02 | 11% |
| Ulf | 10/10 | 1402 days | |
4.4 | 12% |
| Jack Robinson | 10/10 | 1413 days | |
4.38 | 12% |
| Robert Elzinga | 8/10 | 1643 days | |
3.73 | 11% |
| David Schelensky | 10/10 | 1692 days | |
3.83 | 11% |
| Ruven Rintelmann | 9/10 | 1693 days | |
3.83 | 11% |
| Daniel Roedel | 8/10 | 1701 days | 3.62 | 10% | |
| Catherine Schlachter | 9/10 | 2369 days | |
2.51 | 7% |
| Christina Perez | 8/10 | 2369 days | |
2.38 | 7% |
| Casandra Prunica | 9/10 | 2396 days | |
2.45 | 7% |
| Janina Zwerver | 8/10 | 2396 days | |
2.33 | 7% |
| Anton Thisted | 7/10 | 2726 days | |
1.65 | 5% |
| Chantal Mortel | 8/10 | 2764 days | |
1.65 | 5% |
| Soren and Inelase Lindhardbell | 10/10 | 2831 days | |
1.6 | 5% |
| Soren and Inelase Lindhardbell | 10/10 | 2831 days | |
1.6 | 5% |
| Brigitte | 9/10 | 2837 days | |
1.59 | 5% |
| Ron | 8/10 | 2853 days | |
1.48 | 4% |
| Laurits and Bettina | 9/10 | 2856 days | |
1.55 | 4% |
| Kerstin | 9/10 | 2864 days | |
1.54 | 4% |
| Helmut Schmid | 9/10 | 3118 days | |
1.04 | 3% |
| Melinda Moir | 9/10 | 3130 days | |
1.02 | 3% |
| Lars | 8/10 | 3133 days | |
0.96 | 3% |
| Lotte Foged | 9/10 | 3151 days | |
0.98 | 3% |
| Dean | 8/10 | 3199 days | |
0.84 | 2% |
| Lisa Beutler | 10/10 | 3204 days | |
0.87 | 2% |
| Barry Dunster | 10/10 | 3215 days | 0.85 | 2% | |
| Rudy Witt | 8/10 | 3231 days | |
0.78 | 2% |
| Tina | 9/10 | 3245 days | |
0.79 | 2% |
| Ralph & Marloes Meyers | 9/10 | 3458 days | |
0.38 | 1% |
| Wheeler | 10/10 | 3479 days | |
0.33 | 1% |
| Michael Orme | 7/10 | 3480 days | |
0.3 | 1% |
| Tim | 9/10 | 3480 days | |
0.33 | 1% |
| Tina Baun | 8/10 | 3482 days | |
0.31 | 1% |
| Erica Moorhouse | 8/10 | 3495 days | |
0.29 | 1% |
| Dennis & Claudia | 8/10 | 3510 days | |
0.26 | 1% |
| Florian | 7/10 | 3511 days | |
0.25 | 1% |
| D Oostrum | 9/10 | 3513 days | |
0.27 | 1% |
| Mike Peirce | 9/10 | 3849 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| Cecile | 10/10 | 3858 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| Jannievan Osnabrugge | 7/10 | 3865 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| Lousie Hug | 7/10 | 3869 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| Schubert, Wolfgang & Claudia | 8/10 | 3888 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| ilkal | 8/10 | 3931 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| katesc | 9/10 | 3934 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| usigmund | 8/10 | 3934 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| vernenal | 10/10 | 3949 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| Bue Verrept | 8/10 | 3952 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| Monika Wenzel | 10/10 | 3953 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| Louis Duhaime | 9/10 | 3956 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| Jeanette Larsen | 9/10 | 3957 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| johannac | 8/10 | 4064 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| BVanW | 9/10 | 4181 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| Ralph Boese | 10/10 | 4209 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
88%
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.