Hey, 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 Te Anau Glowworm Caves.
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.
190 Valid Reviews
The Te Anau Glowworm Caves experience has a total of 191 reviews. There are 190 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 190 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 49 |
|
26% |
| 9/10 | 43 |
|
23% |
| 8/10 | 41 |
|
22% |
| 7/10 | 34 |
|
18% |
| 6/10 | 9 |
|
5% |
| 5/10 | 8 |
|
4% |
| 4/10 | 5 |
|
3% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
82.05% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Te Anau Glowworm Caves valid reviews is 82.05% and is based on 190 valid reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here as a comparison to the weighted average.
176 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 190 valid reviews, the experience has 176 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 176 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 45 |
|
26% |
| 9/10 | 39 |
|
22% |
| 8/10 | 38 |
|
22% |
| 7/10 | 34 |
|
19% |
| 6/10 | 8 |
|
5% |
| 5/10 | 8 |
|
5% |
| 4/10 | 3 |
|
2% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
82.10% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Te Anau Glowworm Caves face-to-face reviews is 82.10% and is based on 176 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
83.67%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dorothy and Graham Glen | 9/10 | 2963 days | 100% |
| Dan Coates | 9/10 | 3196 days | 83% |
| Dominik | 9/10 | 3196 days | 83% |
| Holloway | 10/10 | 3219 days | 82% |
| Christina | 6/10 | 3287 days | 67% |
| Barbara Knops | 9/10 | 3289 days | 77% |
| Manu Liberta | 10/10 | 3299 days | 77% |
| Bruno | 9/10 | 3309 days | 75% |
| Kirsty Smith | 10/10 | 3332 days | 74% |
| Sophia Satter | 8/10 | 3343 days | 72% |
| Afiya Levy | 10/10 | 3564 days | 57% |
| Johannes Eisel | 6/10 | 3573 days | 49% |
| Alexander Mattea | 5/10 | 3573 days | 43% |
| Timea Bagosi | 9/10 | 3576 days | 56% |
| Riviere | 8/10 | 3587 days | 55% |
| Dani | 8/10 | 3589 days | 55% |
| Benoit Leclerc | 7/10 | 3591 days | 52% |
| Anna Stoehr | 10/10 | 3609 days | 54% |
| Kai Krchmar | 6/10 | 3662 days | 43% |
| Kristina Farkas | 5/10 | 3957 days | 22% |
| Sophia Kadel | 10/10 | 3987 days | 27% |
| Laura and Marie | 7/10 | 3993 days | 24% |
| Rachel S | 10/10 | 4001 days | 26% |
| Joris Giullemot | 8/10 | 4309 days | 3% |
| Laura Metz | 7/10 | 4320 days | 2% |
| Hubertus Thost | 7/10 | 4320 days | 2% |
| Amanda | 4/10 | 4335 days | 0% |
| S B | 10/10 | 4348 days | 1% |
| M K | 10/10 | 4348 days | 1% |
| Maya Bakker-deDreu | 8/10 | 4356 days | 0% |
| Christin Woelk | 9/10 | 4636 days | 35% |
| Maria Klister | 7/10 | 4656 days | 33% |
| Lydia Kleinkoenen | 9/10 | 4676 days | 35% |
| Jessica Grewe | 9/10 | 4676 days | 35% |
| Hannah Lia-Isis Kubillus | 9/10 | 4676 days | 35% |
| Jan Zimmerman | 8/10 | 4687 days | 35% |
| Margaret and Derek McNeil | 10/10 | 4747 days | 35% |
| Frank and Suzanne | 8/10 | 4762 days | 35% |
| RollingMoon | 8/10 | 4823 days | 35% |
| Marcel & Kim Meichtry | 7/10 | 5043 days | 33% |
| Howell Davies | 5/10 | 5046 days | 27% |
| Baas | 7/10 | 5046 days | 33% |
| Pete & Pat Etheridge | 8/10 | 5046 days | 35% |
| Siegfried Richter | 7/10 | 5047 days | 33% |
| Melanie Mathiak | 10/10 | 5049 days | 35% |
| Sig Schrattner | 8/10 | 5049 days | 35% |
| Rebecca Doehl | 7/10 | 5050 days | 33% |
| Seth & Carla | 7/10 | 5051 days | 33% |
| Gabriele Wendt | 9/10 | 5051 days | 35% |
| Tadej Ferjan | 8/10 | 5051 days | 35% |
| Mary Mitchell | 10/10 | 5051 days | 35% |
| Emily Wikston | 9/10 | 5052 days | 35% |
| Andreas & Leonie Fehr | 10/10 | 5058 days | 35% |
| Horst Langstein | 9/10 | 5059 days | 35% |
| Marco Scheiber | 9/10 | 5060 days | 35% |
| Friedrich Kaltner | 10/10 | 5062 days | 35% |
| Frank & Julia | 10/10 | 5065 days | 35% |
| Thyg Lingdal | 10/10 | 5065 days | 35% |
| Nicole van Bergen | 8/10 | 5065 days | 35% |
| Mike & April Prince | 7/10 | 5079 days | 33% |
| Alfred & Henrike | 8/10 | 5091 days | 35% |
| Lyn Stainton | 6/10 | 5140 days | 30% |
| Ken Talan | 10/10 | 5368 days | 35% |
| Jon_and_Family | 9/10 | 5372 days | 35% |
| Gertz | 10/10 | 5376 days | 35% |
| Katarina Bokor | 8/10 | 5380 days | 35% |
| Mark Franklin | 6/10 | 5380 days | 30% |
| Gordon Agent | 10/10 | 5380 days | 35% |
| Maureen Hardy | 8/10 | 5380 days | 35% |
| AJ van Pelt | 8/10 | 5380 days | 35% |
| Werner and Rita | 9/10 | 5387 days | 35% |
| Richard Dudfield | 10/10 | 5389 days | 35% |
| Sayaka | 7/10 | 5389 days | 33% |
| Urs and Isabella | 7/10 | 5390 days | 33% |
| Juliane Kleiu | 10/10 | 5393 days | 35% |
| Linda Kremer | 9/10 | 5394 days | 35% |
| Rebecca Johnston | 9/10 | 5394 days | 35% |
| David Mellard | 10/10 | 5395 days | 35% |
| Bruce & Elaine Chote | 10/10 | 5395 days | 35% |
| Paul Nickson | 8/10 | 5395 days | 35% |
| Monique | 8/10 | 5395 days | 35% |
| Beat & Connie | 10/10 | 5397 days | 35% |
| Alex Stil | 9/10 | 5397 days | 35% |
| Pein van Nosrt | 7/10 | 5402 days | 33% |
| Raith | 9/10 | 5402 days | 35% |
| Elise van Haastert | 8/10 | 5402 days | 35% |
| Claudia | 10/10 | 5404 days | 35% |
| Carolin Ranner | 6/10 | 5404 days | 30% |
| Winskowsky | 9/10 | 5405 days | 35% |
| Hvid | 9/10 | 5419 days | 35% |
| Judith K. | 6/10 | 5421 days | 30% |
| Ruben and Jetske | 7/10 | 5421 days | 33% |
| Roy Seymour | 9/10 | 5422 days | 35% |
| Tom Hill | 10/10 | 5426 days | 35% |
| Ruua Reyrink | 7/10 | 5427 days | 33% |
| Patrick Hugener | 9/10 | 5427 days | 35% |
| JohnHaestad | 4/10 | 5431 days | 23% |
| dollimyxture | 10/10 | 5462 days | 35% |
| aggiemary04 | 10/10 | 5554 days | 35% |
| victoriauk | 4/10 | 5676 days | 23% |
| Baumgarten | 8/10 | 5704 days | 35% |
| travelbunnyadventures | 8/10 | 5707 days | 35% |
| Don & Geraldine | 10/10 | 5743 days | 35% |
| Matthias & Ceristiane | 8/10 | 5755 days | 35% |
| Hilary and Chris Ayton | 9/10 | 5756 days | 35% |
| Lis & Rob Tate | 9/10 | 5758 days | 35% |
| ccthornton100 | 10/10 | 5768 days | 35% |
| Bob Kusesia | 10/10 | 5769 days | 35% |
| Yssel de Schepper | 7/10 | 5774 days | 33% |
| Janny Meerdinnk Veldboow | 7/10 | 5774 days | 33% |
| Arie Ascher | 9/10 | 5775 days | 35% |
| Wolfgang Engelke | 10/10 | 5777 days | 35% |
| Thomas K | 9/10 | 5777 days | 35% |
| Loleit | 7/10 | 5789 days | 33% |
| Mattias Thorm | 9/10 | 5790 days | 35% |
| Vincente Garrido | 4/10 | 5791 days | 23% |
| R Gilge | 10/10 | 5792 days | 35% |
| Erik Hummelmose | 8/10 | 5792 days | 35% |
| Ian E | 6/10 | 5792 days | 30% |
| Nadine Schaee | 9/10 | 5793 days | 35% |
| Belinda Godhard | 2/10 | 5793 days | 15% |
| Uwe Rieper | 10/10 | 5795 days | 35% |
| E.M. Prideaux | 10/10 | 5810 days | 35% |
| Elizabeth E | 8/10 | 5812 days | 35% |
| Stevens Frans | 8/10 | 5813 days | 35% |
| Heinrich Hax | 9/10 | 5816 days | 35% |
| tanh | 7/10 | 5843 days | 33% |
| Stephanie Steiner | 8/10 | 5862 days | 35% |
| Julia May | 9/10 | 5869 days | 35% |
| X Neils | 7/10 | 5880 days | 33% |
| Sarah Smith | 5/10 | 5884 days | 27% |
| Anna | 6/10 | 5888 days | 30% |
| OliverG1 | 7/10 | 6090 days | 33% |
| Philipp | 5/10 | 6102 days | 27% |
| JasminA | 5/10 | 6102 days | 27% |
| ChristinaV | 8/10 | 6112 days | 35% |
| JuergenSchnitzer | 9/10 | 6118 days | 35% |
| AstridVG | 7/10 | 6119 days | 33% |
| NatasjaV | 7/10 | 6120 days | 33% |
| JimmyK | 7/10 | 6120 days | 33% |
| MarcoJ | 9/10 | 6122 days | 35% |
| LucyPoland | 9/10 | 6123 days | 35% |
| Stolz | 7/10 | 6126 days | 33% |
| BrzezinskaM | 10/10 | 6127 days | 35% |
| AndreB | 10/10 | 6127 days | 35% |
| Linda | 7/10 | 6134 days | 33% |
| Susan | 8/10 | 6135 days | 35% |
| Byleveld | 7/10 | 6135 days | 33% |
| JoseB | 8/10 | 6136 days | 35% |
| JetteG | 10/10 | 6136 days | 35% |
| CarolF | 7/10 | 6137 days | 33% |
| Rachel | 9/10 | 6152 days | 35% |
| Claire | 7/10 | 6152 days | 33% |
| Denise | 8/10 | 6153 days | 35% |
| Denk | 8/10 | 6165 days | 35% |
| Klalis | 10/10 | 6167 days | 35% |
| Thomas | 4/10 | 6171 days | 23% |
| Mike | 5/10 | 6172 days | 27% |
| Debbie Mossman | 9/10 | 6177 days | 35% |
| Johann | 10/10 | 6179 days | 35% |
| Carina | 10/10 | 6181 days | 35% |
| Mat | 8/10 | 6220 days | 35% |
| Anette | 7/10 | 6222 days | 33% |
| midlands_missus | 8/10 | 6224 days | 35% |
| David | 7/10 | 6280 days | 33% |
| Suyin | 10/10 | 6300 days | 35% |
| Franz | 10/10 | 6473 days | 35% |
| Jennifer Baulch | 7/10 | 6478 days | 33% |
| George Jeffs | 10/10 | 6481 days | 35% |
| Jacob | 9/10 | 6485 days | 35% |
| Aharon | 10/10 | 6500 days | 35% |
| D.A. Mulder | 8/10 | 6501 days | 35% |
| Knol | 8/10 | 6503 days | 35% |
| Cole Penelope | 8/10 | 6506 days | 35% |
| Jody | 7/10 | 6514 days | 33% |
| Anna | 5/10 | 6514 days | 27% |
| Pauline Thai | 8/10 | 6521 days | 35% |
| Dan Adamson | 8/10 | 6521 days | 35% |
| Stephen Brightman | 8/10 | 6530 days | 35% |
| Madeleine Rowland | 8/10 | 6530 days | 35% |
| Bronwyn Gaby | 9/10 | 6548 days | 35% |
| Free_ride | 9/10 | 6564 days | 35% |
| Michael | 9/10 | 6587 days | 35% |
| Raul | 10/10 | 6837 days | 35% |
| TeamFlorida | 9/10 | 6839 days | 35% |
| TeamFlorida | 8/10 | 6839 days | 35% |
| James | 9/10 | 6852 days | 35% |
| Rudi | 10/10 | 6856 days | 35% |
| Rolf Kruger | 10/10 | 6880 days | 35% |
| Brian | 10/10 | 6884 days | 35% |
Several adjustments to the weighted average are added to improve relevancy and credibility. These adjustments apply equally to all experiences that meet the criteria.
No Adjustment
A reasonable number of reviews are necessary in order for the average to be credible and for an experience to take a prime position within the ranking tables. As such, experiences with only a few reviews have a moderated score. This does not mean that the experience or the reviews can't be trusted. The Te Anau Glowworm Caves experience has plenty of reviews and does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
-4.06% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 42 days. However the Te Anau Glowworm Caves experience does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
In addition, an experience's ranking score may be adjusted for each day there is no new ranking. After 1 day the adjustment comes into effect. The maximum number of days that can be adjusted for is 200 days. Due to the seasonal nature of many businesses, this adjustment is applied dynamically throughout the year.
The Te Anau Glowworm Caves experience has been adjusted for 200 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 197 | -4.00% |
| 198 | -4.02% |
| 199 | -4.04% |
| 200 | -4.06% |
| 201 | -4.08% |
| 202 | -4.10% |
| 203 | -4.12% |
| … | … |
3.11% 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 customers 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.
83%
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.