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 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
96.59%
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 | 617 days | 100% |
| Nick | 9/10 | 3233 days | 3% |
| Mike Dw | 10/10 | 3290 days | 3% |
| Nicole Kasischke | 10/10 | 3296 days | 3% |
| Heather Flanders | 8/10 | 3515 days | 2% |
| Melanie and Pascal | 8/10 | 3542 days | 2% |
| Sebastian and Johanna | 9/10 | 3551 days | 2% |
| Tereza Bulova | 9/10 | 3570 days | 2% |
| Bernd Giermann | 8/10 | 3589 days | 2% |
| Magdalena | 7/10 | 3614 days | 2% |
| Kayla | 10/10 | 3633 days | 2% |
| Sean | 10/10 | 3633 days | 2% |
| Louis Nilsson | 10/10 | 3635 days | 2% |
| Lene Nilsson | 10/10 | 3635 days | 2% |
| Janina | 10/10 | 3640 days | 2% |
| Evelyn Rloeh | 7/10 | 3641 days | 2% |
| Gio Zy | 8/10 | 3644 days | 2% |
| Kirsty Smith | 10/10 | 3660 days | 2% |
| Huon | 8/10 | 3877 days | 1% |
| Ana Coulee | 9/10 | 3878 days | 1% |
| Cecile Santiaux | 10/10 | 3878 days | 1% |
| Molly Bogeberg | 9/10 | 3883 days | 1% |
| Jenna Kuittinen | 8/10 | 3884 days | 1% |
| Ben Keiser | 10/10 | 3885 days | 1% |
| Tom Teuber | 10/10 | 3887 days | 1% |
| Anika Danits | 10/10 | 3887 days | 1% |
| Valerie Bernardini | 10/10 | 3893 days | 1% |
| Dan Ramsl | 10/10 | 3898 days | 1% |
| Lauren Dinnage | 10/10 | 3904 days | 1% |
| Patrick Thumeyer | 10/10 | 3904 days | 1% |
| Max | 10/10 | 3905 days | 1% |
| John and Jan | 9/10 | 3906 days | 1% |
| Volker Stroenisch | 10/10 | 3910 days | 1% |
| Josh Symons | 10/10 | 3911 days | 1% |
| Emily Garside | 10/10 | 3912 days | 1% |
| Chandra Macraigne | 7/10 | 3912 days | 1% |
| Horitz | 10/10 | 3917 days | 1% |
| Dani | 10/10 | 3917 days | 1% |
| Lee Sandberg | 8/10 | 3922 days | 1% |
| Tina Rust | 10/10 | 3923 days | 1% |
| William Lendway | 9/10 | 3924 days | 1% |
| Sophie Kalnymsky | 10/10 | 3925 days | 1% |
| Xavier Bistodeau | 10/10 | 3929 days | 1% |
| Quinn McCusker | 10/10 | 3933 days | 1% |
| Maria and Grace | 6/10 | 3935 days | 1% |
| Maria Brauherr | 10/10 | 3936 days | 1% |
| Veronique Kaplan | 10/10 | 3937 days | 1% |
| Christine Schtenker | 10/10 | 3940 days | 1% |
| Kristyna Mokrackoua | 9/10 | 3942 days | 1% |
| Florian Mueller | 10/10 | 3944 days | 1% |
| Anna | 10/10 | 3944 days | 1% |
| Iris Kerbler | 10/10 | 3948 days | 1% |
| Livia and Dave | 10/10 | 3950 days | 1% |
| Elisabeth Grabner | 7/10 | 3951 days | 1% |
| Christian Reimund | 9/10 | 3953 days | 1% |
| Stefanie Giese | 10/10 | 3953 days | 1% |
| Kim and Leon | 10/10 | 3957 days | 1% |
| Matthew Hallowell | 10/10 | 3961 days | 1% |
| Justin Kechanski | 8/10 | 3979 days | 1% |
| Steffen and Johannes | 9/10 | 3983 days | 1% |
| Ixtaso Roncal | 10/10 | 4028 days | 1% |
| Naelan Le Borgue | 10/10 | 4260 days | 0% |
| Oliver Pester | 10/10 | 4269 days | 0% |
| Kristina M | 10/10 | 4297 days | 0% |
| Bes | 10/10 | 4303 days | 0% |
| Inge van Noorf | 10/10 | 4357 days | 0% |
| FlyingKiwiGirl | 10/10 | 4450 days | 1% |
| Caroline Jonsson | 10/10 | 4603 days | 1% |
| Jonny Ronnblom | 10/10 | 4603 days | 1% |
| Martin Buchta | 9/10 | 4635 days | 1% |
| Anne Haenchen | 9/10 | 4635 days | 1% |
| Markus | 10/10 | 4646 days | 1% |
| Cornelia Witte | 10/10 | 4646 days | 1% |
| Sarah | 10/10 | 4659 days | 1% |
| Mike Majnik | 10/10 | 4659 days | 1% |
| Pioter Jurkowski | 10/10 | 4694 days | 1% |
| Patrick | 8/10 | 4694 days | 1% |
| Emma | 7/10 | 4694 days | 1% |
| Christin Woelk | 10/10 | 4964 days | 1% |
| Patrick Stoeit | 10/10 | 4974 days | 1% |
| Pete Wilson | 10/10 | 4986 days | 1% |
| Yu-Ti Chu | 9/10 | 4991 days | 1% |
| Alice Berg | 10/10 | 4993 days | 1% |
| Camille Coombes | 9/10 | 4993 days | 1% |
| Jan | 10/10 | 5000 days | 1% |
| Frederic Birke | 10/10 | 5002 days | 1% |
| Glenn Surzur | 8/10 | 5002 days | 1% |
| Caderet | 10/10 | 5002 days | 1% |
| Jan & Jile | 10/10 | 5005 days | 1% |
| Lars Schulz | 10/10 | 5015 days | 1% |
| N smith | 10/10 | 5059 days | 1% |
| Michael Kretzschmar | 10/10 | 5076 days | 1% |
| Tanja Rudolf | 10/10 | 5078 days | 1% |
| Peter Adams | 9/10 | 5359 days | 1% |
| Martin Guillaume | 10/10 | 5361 days | 1% |
| Jeroen Bartos | 9/10 | 5378 days | 1% |
| Jon Winter | 9/10 | 5380 days | 1% |
| Roeland Driessen | 10/10 | 5425 days | 1% |
| Rachel_Flowers | 10/10 | 5456 days | 1% |
| Sid | 10/10 | 5486 days | 1% |
| Alibeare | 10/10 | 5517 days | 1% |
| Susannah Eduart | 10/10 | 5711 days | 1% |
| Ann-Katrine & Sille | 10/10 | 5729 days | 1% |
| Josef & Christine Evers | 9/10 | 5740 days | 1% |
| Petersen | 10/10 | 5752 days | 1% |
| Gerry Nichols | 10/10 | 5754 days | 1% |
| Helen T | 10/10 | 6065 days | 1% |
| Bob Lenihan | 10/10 | 6082 days | 1% |
| Radek Hoferek | 9/10 | 6120 days | 1% |
| Pam K | 10/10 | 6123 days | 1% |
| Sabine Locker | 10/10 | 6140 days | 1% |
| csziegler | 10/10 | 6170 days | 1% |
| Rankers Rocks | 10/10 | 6186 days | 1% |
| Tait Suridge | 8/10 | 6197 days | 1% |
| Becca1 | 9/10 | 6432 days | 1% |
| Barry Treve | 9/10 | 6437 days | 1% |
| AnjaChrist | 10/10 | 6448 days | 1% |
| qofd | 10/10 | 7131 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
0.29% 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.