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
96.43%
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 | 352 days | 100% |
| Nick | 9/10 | 2968 days | 3% |
| Mike Dw | 10/10 | 3025 days | 3% |
| Nicole Kasischke | 10/10 | 3031 days | 3% |
| Heather Flanders | 8/10 | 3250 days | 2% |
| Melanie and Pascal | 8/10 | 3277 days | 2% |
| Sebastian and Johanna | 9/10 | 3286 days | 2% |
| Tereza Bulova | 9/10 | 3305 days | 2% |
| Bernd Giermann | 8/10 | 3324 days | 2% |
| Magdalena | 7/10 | 3349 days | 2% |
| Kayla | 10/10 | 3368 days | 2% |
| Sean | 10/10 | 3368 days | 2% |
| Louis Nilsson | 10/10 | 3370 days | 2% |
| Lene Nilsson | 10/10 | 3370 days | 2% |
| Janina | 10/10 | 3375 days | 2% |
| Evelyn Rloeh | 7/10 | 3376 days | 2% |
| Gio Zy | 8/10 | 3379 days | 2% |
| Kirsty Smith | 10/10 | 3395 days | 2% |
| Huon | 8/10 | 3612 days | 2% |
| Ana Coulee | 9/10 | 3613 days | 2% |
| Cecile Santiaux | 10/10 | 3613 days | 2% |
| Molly Bogeberg | 9/10 | 3618 days | 2% |
| Jenna Kuittinen | 8/10 | 3619 days | 2% |
| Ben Keiser | 10/10 | 3620 days | 2% |
| Tom Teuber | 10/10 | 3622 days | 2% |
| Anika Danits | 10/10 | 3622 days | 2% |
| Valerie Bernardini | 10/10 | 3628 days | 2% |
| Dan Ramsl | 10/10 | 3633 days | 2% |
| Lauren Dinnage | 10/10 | 3639 days | 2% |
| Patrick Thumeyer | 10/10 | 3639 days | 2% |
| Max | 10/10 | 3640 days | 2% |
| John and Jan | 9/10 | 3641 days | 2% |
| Volker Stroenisch | 10/10 | 3645 days | 2% |
| Josh Symons | 10/10 | 3646 days | 2% |
| Emily Garside | 10/10 | 3647 days | 2% |
| Chandra Macraigne | 7/10 | 3647 days | 1% |
| Horitz | 10/10 | 3652 days | 2% |
| Dani | 10/10 | 3652 days | 2% |
| Lee Sandberg | 8/10 | 3657 days | 1% |
| Tina Rust | 10/10 | 3658 days | 1% |
| William Lendway | 9/10 | 3659 days | 1% |
| Sophie Kalnymsky | 10/10 | 3660 days | 1% |
| Xavier Bistodeau | 10/10 | 3664 days | 1% |
| Quinn McCusker | 10/10 | 3668 days | 1% |
| Maria and Grace | 6/10 | 3670 days | 1% |
| Maria Brauherr | 10/10 | 3671 days | 1% |
| Veronique Kaplan | 10/10 | 3672 days | 1% |
| Christine Schtenker | 10/10 | 3675 days | 1% |
| Kristyna Mokrackoua | 9/10 | 3677 days | 1% |
| Florian Mueller | 10/10 | 3679 days | 1% |
| Anna | 10/10 | 3679 days | 1% |
| Iris Kerbler | 10/10 | 3683 days | 1% |
| Livia and Dave | 10/10 | 3685 days | 1% |
| Elisabeth Grabner | 7/10 | 3686 days | 1% |
| Christian Reimund | 9/10 | 3688 days | 1% |
| Stefanie Giese | 10/10 | 3688 days | 1% |
| Kim and Leon | 10/10 | 3692 days | 1% |
| Matthew Hallowell | 10/10 | 3696 days | 1% |
| Justin Kechanski | 8/10 | 3714 days | 1% |
| Steffen and Johannes | 9/10 | 3718 days | 1% |
| Ixtaso Roncal | 10/10 | 3763 days | 1% |
| Naelan Le Borgue | 10/10 | 3995 days | 1% |
| Oliver Pester | 10/10 | 4004 days | 1% |
| Kristina M | 10/10 | 4032 days | 1% |
| Bes | 10/10 | 4038 days | 1% |
| Inge van Noorf | 10/10 | 4092 days | 1% |
| FlyingKiwiGirl | 10/10 | 4185 days | 0% |
| Caroline Jonsson | 10/10 | 4338 days | 0% |
| Jonny Ronnblom | 10/10 | 4338 days | 0% |
| Martin Buchta | 9/10 | 4370 days | 0% |
| Anne Haenchen | 9/10 | 4370 days | 0% |
| Markus | 10/10 | 4381 days | 1% |
| Cornelia Witte | 10/10 | 4381 days | 1% |
| Sarah | 10/10 | 4394 days | 1% |
| Mike Majnik | 10/10 | 4394 days | 1% |
| Pioter Jurkowski | 10/10 | 4429 days | 1% |
| Patrick | 8/10 | 4429 days | 1% |
| Emma | 7/10 | 4429 days | 1% |
| Christin Woelk | 10/10 | 4699 days | 1% |
| Patrick Stoeit | 10/10 | 4709 days | 1% |
| Pete Wilson | 10/10 | 4721 days | 1% |
| Yu-Ti Chu | 9/10 | 4726 days | 1% |
| Alice Berg | 10/10 | 4728 days | 1% |
| Camille Coombes | 9/10 | 4728 days | 1% |
| Jan | 10/10 | 4735 days | 1% |
| Frederic Birke | 10/10 | 4737 days | 1% |
| Glenn Surzur | 8/10 | 4737 days | 1% |
| Caderet | 10/10 | 4737 days | 1% |
| Jan & Jile | 10/10 | 4740 days | 1% |
| Lars Schulz | 10/10 | 4750 days | 1% |
| N smith | 10/10 | 4794 days | 1% |
| Michael Kretzschmar | 10/10 | 4811 days | 1% |
| Tanja Rudolf | 10/10 | 4813 days | 1% |
| Peter Adams | 9/10 | 5094 days | 1% |
| Martin Guillaume | 10/10 | 5096 days | 1% |
| Jeroen Bartos | 9/10 | 5113 days | 1% |
| Jon Winter | 9/10 | 5115 days | 1% |
| Roeland Driessen | 10/10 | 5160 days | 1% |
| Rachel_Flowers | 10/10 | 5191 days | 1% |
| Sid | 10/10 | 5221 days | 1% |
| Alibeare | 10/10 | 5252 days | 1% |
| Susannah Eduart | 10/10 | 5446 days | 1% |
| Ann-Katrine & Sille | 10/10 | 5464 days | 1% |
| Josef & Christine Evers | 9/10 | 5475 days | 1% |
| Petersen | 10/10 | 5487 days | 1% |
| Gerry Nichols | 10/10 | 5489 days | 1% |
| Helen T | 10/10 | 5800 days | 1% |
| Bob Lenihan | 10/10 | 5817 days | 1% |
| Radek Hoferek | 9/10 | 5855 days | 1% |
| Pam K | 10/10 | 5858 days | 1% |
| Sabine Locker | 10/10 | 5875 days | 1% |
| csziegler | 10/10 | 5905 days | 1% |
| Rankers Rocks | 10/10 | 5921 days | 1% |
| Tait Suridge | 8/10 | 5932 days | 1% |
| Becca1 | 9/10 | 6167 days | 1% |
| Barry Treve | 9/10 | 6172 days | 1% |
| AnjaChrist | 10/10 | 6183 days | 1% |
| qofd | 10/10 | 6866 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.