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 Juno Hall Backpackers and Camping.
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.
Juno Hall Backpackers and Camping
Valid Reviews
92 Valid Reviews
The Juno Hall Backpackers and Camping experience has a total of 96 reviews. There are 92 valid reviews that are included when calculating the ranking score and 4 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 92 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 55 |
|
60% |
| 9/10 | 21 |
|
23% |
| 8/10 | 13 |
|
14% |
| 7/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 6/10 | 2 |
|
2% |
| 5/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
93.70% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Juno Hall Backpackers and Camping valid reviews is 93.70% and is based on 92 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
4 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 92 valid reviews, the experience has 4 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 4 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 2 |
|
50% |
| 9/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 8/10 | 2 |
|
50% |
| 7/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 6/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 5/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
90.00% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Juno Hall Backpackers and Camping face-to-face reviews is 90.00% and is based on 4 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
96.48%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Marijke | 10/10 | 54 days | 100% |
| Bea | 10/10 | 84 days | 100% |
| Cam an | 10/10 | 84 days | 100% |
| Pat | 10/10 | 329 days | 94% |
| Sabine | 10/10 | 389 days | 91% |
| Rachel | 6/10 | 389 days | 79% |
| Tine Warner | 10/10 | 420 days | 90% |
| Ashley + Mike | 10/10 | 420 days | 90% |
| Fabian Ullrich | 10/10 | 450 days | 89% |
| Rian Caccianiga | 10/10 | 450 days | 89% |
| K Robertson | 10/10 | 481 days | 87% |
| Marie Perret | 10/10 | 481 days | 87% |
| Katie | 10/10 | 664 days | 75% |
| James Kidston | 10/10 | 695 days | 72% |
| Szilveszter | 10/10 | 695 days | 72% |
| Claire Jones | 10/10 | 695 days | 72% |
| Charlie | 10/10 | 695 days | 72% |
| Manuel Mayer | 10/10 | 723 days | 70% |
| Wayne | 10/10 | 723 days | 70% |
| Arie | 9/10 | 723 days | 69% |
| Kirsty | 8/10 | 754 days | 66% |
| Jesper | 10/10 | 754 days | 67% |
| Laura Jarry | 10/10 | 846 days | 59% |
| cearon | 9/10 | 999 days | 43% |
| MB | 7/10 | 1303 days | 19% |
| Patrícia | 9/10 | 1394 days | 15% |
| Ashleigh | 10/10 | 1425 days | 14% |
| Thomas | 10/10 | 1484 days | 11% |
| Finlay | 10/10 | 1576 days | 8% |
| Stefan Hohmann | 8/10 | 1790 days | 4% |
| Liz Wade | 8/10 | 1818 days | 4% |
| Kim | 8/10 | 1819 days | 4% |
| James Murphy | 10/10 | 1850 days | 4% |
| Dil | 10/10 | 1850 days | 4% |
| harre medemblik | 8/10 | 1911 days | 4% |
| Dennis Rijbroek | 10/10 | 1972 days | 4% |
| Mik Jennings | 9/10 | 1972 days | 4% |
| Anselm | 9/10 | 2003 days | 4% |
| Adrian and Tanya | 10/10 | 2034 days | 4% |
| Kate | 9/10 | 2095 days | 4% |
| Tash & Laura | 9/10 | 2184 days | 4% |
| Fabienne&Dustin | 10/10 | 2184 days | 4% |
| Alis | 10/10 | 2184 days | 4% |
| Emma | 10/10 | 2184 days | 4% |
| Nik | 9/10 | 2184 days | 4% |
| seph | 9/10 | 2215 days | 4% |
| Jan Z. | 10/10 | 2215 days | 4% |
| Gerrit | 10/10 | 2215 days | 4% |
| M Elsten | 10/10 | 2215 days | 4% |
| Jason | 10/10 | 2246 days | 4% |
| Agathe | 10/10 | 2276 days | 3% |
| Ali | 9/10 | 2307 days | 3% |
| Xiaoming Guo | 10/10 | 2307 days | 3% |
| Grizzly Girl | 10/10 | 2307 days | 3% |
| Gio | 10/10 | 2368 days | 3% |
| Stefano Clerici | 10/10 | 2399 days | 3% |
| C J B | 10/10 | 2429 days | 3% |
| L + J | 10/10 | 2460 days | 3% |
| Florian | 10/10 | 2490 days | 3% |
| Boguslaw MAKIELLO | 10/10 | 2504 days | 2% |
| M A Pelton | 9/10 | 2546 days | 3% |
| UK 50-something couple | 8/10 | 2549 days | 3% |
| Alyson Reid | 9/10 | 2563 days | 3% |
| Ewan Evans | 9/10 | 2613 days | 3% |
| Lucy Watson | 10/10 | 2640 days | 3% |
| Mairead Bushe | 10/10 | 2645 days | 3% |
| Artemis | 9/10 | 2858 days | 2% |
| Naira Prudencio | 10/10 | 2884 days | 2% |
| Mailhos Cécile | 10/10 | 2889 days | 2% |
| Caryn Grosvenor | 10/10 | 2908 days | 2% |
| Catherine Kay | 8/10 | 2929 days | 2% |
| Svetlana L | 10/10 | 2939 days | 2% |
| Rebecca Lindsey | 9/10 | 2944 days | 2% |
| Neil Warnock | 10/10 | 2975 days | 2% |
| Shelly Stanchuk | 9/10 | 3005 days | 2% |
| Becky and James | 10/10 | 3039 days | 2% |
| Mikael Torres | 9/10 | 3099 days | 2% |
| Pamela Hoffman | 8/10 | 3192 days | 2% |
| Daniel Fuell | 10/10 | 3199 days | 2% |
| John-Jozef Proczka | 9/10 | 3280 days | 1% |
| Loic Journet | 8/10 | 3287 days | 1% |
| Janneke Hekhuis | 8/10 | 3291 days | 1% |
| Max Brunner | 9/10 | 3334 days | 1% |
| Ruth P | 8/10 | 3342 days | 1% |
| Nurul Nadia Naziron | 9/10 | 3407 days | 1% |
| Lotte Spors | 10/10 | 3495 days | 1% |
| Chiara Magelli | 10/10 | 3508 days | 1% |
| Philip Mattes | 9/10 | 3580 days | 1% |
| Claude Nobs | 6/10 | 3676 days | 1% |
| Simon Mehlmann | 10/10 | 3959 days | 0% |
| Camille Gagnant | 8/10 | 4031 days | 0% |
| Amanda Neall | 8/10 | 5070 days | 0% |
Adjustments
Several adjustments to the weighted average are added to improve relevancy and credibility. These adjustments apply equally to all experiences that meet the criteria.
Sample Size Adjustment
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 Juno Hall Backpackers and Camping experience has plenty of reviews and does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
Recent Reviews Adjustment
-0.70% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 48 days. However the Juno Hall Backpackers and Camping 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 Juno Hall Backpackers and Camping experience has been adjusted for 34 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 31 | -0.64% |
| 32 | -0.66% |
| 33 | -0.68% |
| 34 | -0.70% |
| 35 | -0.72% |
| 36 | -0.74% |
| 37 | -0.76% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
0.36% 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.
Final Ranking Score
96%
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.