G'day, 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 Wharariki Beach Walk.
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.
Wharariki Beach Walk
Valid Reviews
118 Valid Reviews
The Wharariki Beach Walk experience has a total of 118 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 118 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 80 |
|
68% |
| 9/10 | 21 |
|
18% |
| 8/10 | 11 |
|
9% |
| 7/10 | 5 |
|
4% |
| 6/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 5/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
94.75% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Wharariki Beach Walk valid reviews is 94.75% and is based on 118 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
98 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 118 valid reviews, the experience has 98 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 98 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 62 |
|
63% |
| 9/10 | 19 |
|
19% |
| 8/10 | 11 |
|
11% |
| 7/10 | 5 |
|
5% |
| 6/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 5/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
93.88% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Wharariki Beach Walk face-to-face reviews is 93.88% and is based on 98 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
96.47%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tz | 10/10 | 289 days | 100% |
| Nick | 9/10 | 2905 days | 3% |
| Mike Dw | 10/10 | 2962 days | 3% |
| Nicole Kasischke | 10/10 | 2968 days | 3% |
| Heather Flanders | 8/10 | 3187 days | 2% |
| Melanie and Pascal | 8/10 | 3214 days | 2% |
| Sebastian and Johanna | 9/10 | 3223 days | 2% |
| Tereza Bulova | 9/10 | 3242 days | 2% |
| Bernd Giermann | 8/10 | 3261 days | 2% |
| Magdalena | 7/10 | 3286 days | 2% |
| Kayla | 10/10 | 3305 days | 2% |
| Sean | 10/10 | 3305 days | 2% |
| Louis Nilsson | 10/10 | 3307 days | 2% |
| Lene Nilsson | 10/10 | 3307 days | 2% |
| Janina | 10/10 | 3312 days | 2% |
| Evelyn Rloeh | 7/10 | 3313 days | 2% |
| Gio Zy | 8/10 | 3316 days | 2% |
| Kirsty Smith | 10/10 | 3332 days | 2% |
| Huon | 8/10 | 3549 days | 2% |
| Ana Coulee | 9/10 | 3550 days | 2% |
| Cecile Santiaux | 10/10 | 3550 days | 2% |
| Molly Bogeberg | 9/10 | 3555 days | 2% |
| Jenna Kuittinen | 8/10 | 3556 days | 2% |
| Ben Keiser | 10/10 | 3557 days | 2% |
| Tom Teuber | 10/10 | 3559 days | 2% |
| Anika Danits | 10/10 | 3559 days | 2% |
| Valerie Bernardini | 10/10 | 3565 days | 2% |
| Dan Ramsl | 10/10 | 3570 days | 2% |
| Lauren Dinnage | 10/10 | 3576 days | 2% |
| Patrick Thumeyer | 10/10 | 3576 days | 2% |
| Max | 10/10 | 3577 days | 2% |
| John and Jan | 9/10 | 3578 days | 2% |
| Volker Stroenisch | 10/10 | 3582 days | 2% |
| Josh Symons | 10/10 | 3583 days | 2% |
| Emily Garside | 10/10 | 3584 days | 2% |
| Chandra Macraigne | 7/10 | 3584 days | 1% |
| Horitz | 10/10 | 3589 days | 2% |
| Dani | 10/10 | 3589 days | 2% |
| Lee Sandberg | 8/10 | 3594 days | 2% |
| Tina Rust | 10/10 | 3595 days | 2% |
| William Lendway | 9/10 | 3596 days | 2% |
| Sophie Kalnymsky | 10/10 | 3597 days | 2% |
| Xavier Bistodeau | 10/10 | 3601 days | 2% |
| Quinn McCusker | 10/10 | 3605 days | 2% |
| Maria and Grace | 6/10 | 3607 days | 1% |
| Maria Brauherr | 10/10 | 3608 days | 2% |
| Veronique Kaplan | 10/10 | 3609 days | 2% |
| Christine Schtenker | 10/10 | 3612 days | 2% |
| Kristyna Mokrackoua | 9/10 | 3614 days | 2% |
| Florian Mueller | 10/10 | 3616 days | 2% |
| Anna | 10/10 | 3616 days | 2% |
| Iris Kerbler | 10/10 | 3620 days | 2% |
| Livia and Dave | 10/10 | 3622 days | 2% |
| Elisabeth Grabner | 7/10 | 3623 days | 1% |
| Christian Reimund | 9/10 | 3625 days | 2% |
| Stefanie Giese | 10/10 | 3625 days | 2% |
| Kim and Leon | 10/10 | 3629 days | 2% |
| Matthew Hallowell | 10/10 | 3633 days | 2% |
| Justin Kechanski | 8/10 | 3651 days | 1% |
| Steffen and Johannes | 9/10 | 3655 days | 1% |
| Ixtaso Roncal | 10/10 | 3700 days | 1% |
| Naelan Le Borgue | 10/10 | 3932 days | 1% |
| Oliver Pester | 10/10 | 3941 days | 1% |
| Kristina M | 10/10 | 3969 days | 1% |
| Bes | 10/10 | 3975 days | 1% |
| Inge van Noorf | 10/10 | 4029 days | 1% |
| FlyingKiwiGirl | 10/10 | 4122 days | 1% |
| Caroline Jonsson | 10/10 | 4275 days | 0% |
| Jonny Ronnblom | 10/10 | 4275 days | 0% |
| Martin Buchta | 9/10 | 4307 days | 0% |
| Anne Haenchen | 9/10 | 4307 days | 0% |
| Markus | 10/10 | 4318 days | 0% |
| Cornelia Witte | 10/10 | 4318 days | 0% |
| Sarah | 10/10 | 4331 days | 0% |
| Mike Majnik | 10/10 | 4331 days | 0% |
| Pioter Jurkowski | 10/10 | 4366 days | 0% |
| Patrick | 8/10 | 4366 days | 0% |
| Emma | 7/10 | 4366 days | 0% |
| Christin Woelk | 10/10 | 4636 days | 1% |
| Patrick Stoeit | 10/10 | 4646 days | 1% |
| Pete Wilson | 10/10 | 4658 days | 1% |
| Yu-Ti Chu | 9/10 | 4663 days | 1% |
| Alice Berg | 10/10 | 4665 days | 1% |
| Camille Coombes | 9/10 | 4665 days | 1% |
| Jan | 10/10 | 4672 days | 1% |
| Frederic Birke | 10/10 | 4674 days | 1% |
| Glenn Surzur | 8/10 | 4674 days | 1% |
| Caderet | 10/10 | 4674 days | 1% |
| Jan & Jile | 10/10 | 4677 days | 1% |
| Lars Schulz | 10/10 | 4687 days | 1% |
| N smith | 10/10 | 4731 days | 1% |
| Michael Kretzschmar | 10/10 | 4748 days | 1% |
| Tanja Rudolf | 10/10 | 4750 days | 1% |
| Peter Adams | 9/10 | 5031 days | 1% |
| Martin Guillaume | 10/10 | 5033 days | 1% |
| Jeroen Bartos | 9/10 | 5050 days | 1% |
| Jon Winter | 9/10 | 5052 days | 1% |
| Roeland Driessen | 10/10 | 5097 days | 1% |
| Rachel_Flowers | 10/10 | 5128 days | 1% |
| Sid | 10/10 | 5158 days | 1% |
| Alibeare | 10/10 | 5189 days | 1% |
| Susannah Eduart | 10/10 | 5383 days | 1% |
| Ann-Katrine & Sille | 10/10 | 5401 days | 1% |
| Josef & Christine Evers | 9/10 | 5412 days | 1% |
| Petersen | 10/10 | 5424 days | 1% |
| Gerry Nichols | 10/10 | 5426 days | 1% |
| Helen T | 10/10 | 5737 days | 1% |
| Bob Lenihan | 10/10 | 5754 days | 1% |
| Radek Hoferek | 9/10 | 5792 days | 1% |
| Pam K | 10/10 | 5795 days | 1% |
| Sabine Locker | 10/10 | 5812 days | 1% |
| csziegler | 10/10 | 5842 days | 1% |
| Rankers Rocks | 10/10 | 5858 days | 1% |
| Tait Suridge | 8/10 | 5869 days | 1% |
| Becca1 | 9/10 | 6104 days | 1% |
| Barry Treve | 9/10 | 6109 days | 1% |
| AnjaChrist | 10/10 | 6120 days | 1% |
| qofd | 10/10 | 6803 days | 1% |
Adjustments
No Adjustment
Several adjustments to the weighted average may be added to improve relevancy and credibility. Wharariki Beach Walk does not meet the criteria for any of these adjustments to apply.
Balancing Adjustment
0.30% 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 folk 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
97%
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.