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
96.39%
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 | 346 days | 100% |
| Nick | 9/10 | 2962 days | 3% |
| Mike Dw | 10/10 | 3019 days | 3% |
| Nicole Kasischke | 10/10 | 3025 days | 3% |
| Heather Flanders | 8/10 | 3244 days | 2% |
| Melanie and Pascal | 8/10 | 3271 days | 2% |
| Sebastian and Johanna | 9/10 | 3280 days | 2% |
| Tereza Bulova | 9/10 | 3299 days | 2% |
| Bernd Giermann | 8/10 | 3318 days | 2% |
| Magdalena | 7/10 | 3343 days | 2% |
| Kayla | 10/10 | 3362 days | 2% |
| Sean | 10/10 | 3362 days | 2% |
| Louis Nilsson | 10/10 | 3364 days | 2% |
| Lene Nilsson | 10/10 | 3364 days | 2% |
| Janina | 10/10 | 3369 days | 2% |
| Evelyn Rloeh | 7/10 | 3370 days | 2% |
| Gio Zy | 8/10 | 3373 days | 2% |
| Kirsty Smith | 10/10 | 3389 days | 2% |
| Huon | 8/10 | 3606 days | 2% |
| Ana Coulee | 9/10 | 3607 days | 2% |
| Cecile Santiaux | 10/10 | 3607 days | 2% |
| Molly Bogeberg | 9/10 | 3612 days | 2% |
| Jenna Kuittinen | 8/10 | 3613 days | 2% |
| Ben Keiser | 10/10 | 3614 days | 2% |
| Tom Teuber | 10/10 | 3616 days | 2% |
| Anika Danits | 10/10 | 3616 days | 2% |
| Valerie Bernardini | 10/10 | 3622 days | 2% |
| Dan Ramsl | 10/10 | 3627 days | 2% |
| Lauren Dinnage | 10/10 | 3633 days | 2% |
| Patrick Thumeyer | 10/10 | 3633 days | 2% |
| Max | 10/10 | 3634 days | 2% |
| John and Jan | 9/10 | 3635 days | 2% |
| Volker Stroenisch | 10/10 | 3639 days | 2% |
| Josh Symons | 10/10 | 3640 days | 2% |
| Emily Garside | 10/10 | 3641 days | 2% |
| Chandra Macraigne | 7/10 | 3641 days | 1% |
| Horitz | 10/10 | 3646 days | 2% |
| Dani | 10/10 | 3646 days | 2% |
| Lee Sandberg | 8/10 | 3651 days | 1% |
| Tina Rust | 10/10 | 3652 days | 2% |
| William Lendway | 9/10 | 3653 days | 2% |
| Sophie Kalnymsky | 10/10 | 3654 days | 2% |
| Xavier Bistodeau | 10/10 | 3658 days | 2% |
| Quinn McCusker | 10/10 | 3662 days | 1% |
| Maria and Grace | 6/10 | 3664 days | 1% |
| Maria Brauherr | 10/10 | 3665 days | 1% |
| Veronique Kaplan | 10/10 | 3666 days | 1% |
| Christine Schtenker | 10/10 | 3669 days | 1% |
| Kristyna Mokrackoua | 9/10 | 3671 days | 1% |
| Florian Mueller | 10/10 | 3673 days | 1% |
| Anna | 10/10 | 3673 days | 1% |
| Iris Kerbler | 10/10 | 3677 days | 1% |
| Livia and Dave | 10/10 | 3679 days | 1% |
| Elisabeth Grabner | 7/10 | 3680 days | 1% |
| Christian Reimund | 9/10 | 3682 days | 1% |
| Stefanie Giese | 10/10 | 3682 days | 1% |
| Kim and Leon | 10/10 | 3686 days | 1% |
| Matthew Hallowell | 10/10 | 3690 days | 1% |
| Justin Kechanski | 8/10 | 3708 days | 1% |
| Steffen and Johannes | 9/10 | 3712 days | 1% |
| Ixtaso Roncal | 10/10 | 3757 days | 1% |
| Naelan Le Borgue | 10/10 | 3989 days | 1% |
| Oliver Pester | 10/10 | 3999 days | 1% |
| Kristina M | 10/10 | 4027 days | 1% |
| Bes | 10/10 | 4032 days | 1% |
| Inge van Noorf | 10/10 | 4086 days | 1% |
| FlyingKiwiGirl | 10/10 | 4180 days | 0% |
| Caroline Jonsson | 10/10 | 4332 days | 0% |
| Jonny Ronnblom | 10/10 | 4332 days | 0% |
| Martin Buchta | 9/10 | 4364 days | 0% |
| Anne Haenchen | 9/10 | 4364 days | 0% |
| Markus | 10/10 | 4375 days | 0% |
| Cornelia Witte | 10/10 | 4375 days | 0% |
| Sarah | 10/10 | 4388 days | 1% |
| Mike Majnik | 10/10 | 4388 days | 1% |
| Pioter Jurkowski | 10/10 | 4423 days | 1% |
| Patrick | 8/10 | 4423 days | 1% |
| Emma | 7/10 | 4423 days | 1% |
| Christin Woelk | 10/10 | 4693 days | 1% |
| Patrick Stoeit | 10/10 | 4703 days | 1% |
| Pete Wilson | 10/10 | 4715 days | 1% |
| Yu-Ti Chu | 9/10 | 4720 days | 1% |
| Alice Berg | 10/10 | 4722 days | 1% |
| Camille Coombes | 9/10 | 4722 days | 1% |
| Jan | 10/10 | 4729 days | 1% |
| Frederic Birke | 10/10 | 4731 days | 1% |
| Glenn Surzur | 8/10 | 4731 days | 1% |
| Caderet | 10/10 | 4731 days | 1% |
| Jan & Jile | 10/10 | 4734 days | 1% |
| Lars Schulz | 10/10 | 4744 days | 1% |
| N smith | 10/10 | 4788 days | 1% |
| Michael Kretzschmar | 10/10 | 4805 days | 1% |
| Tanja Rudolf | 10/10 | 4807 days | 1% |
| Peter Adams | 9/10 | 5088 days | 1% |
| Martin Guillaume | 10/10 | 5090 days | 1% |
| Jeroen Bartos | 9/10 | 5107 days | 1% |
| Jon Winter | 9/10 | 5109 days | 1% |
| Roeland Driessen | 10/10 | 5154 days | 1% |
| Rachel_Flowers | 10/10 | 5185 days | 1% |
| Sid | 10/10 | 5215 days | 1% |
| Alibeare | 10/10 | 5246 days | 1% |
| Susannah Eduart | 10/10 | 5440 days | 1% |
| Ann-Katrine & Sille | 10/10 | 5458 days | 1% |
| Josef & Christine Evers | 9/10 | 5469 days | 1% |
| Petersen | 10/10 | 5481 days | 1% |
| Gerry Nichols | 10/10 | 5483 days | 1% |
| Helen T | 10/10 | 5794 days | 1% |
| Bob Lenihan | 10/10 | 5811 days | 1% |
| Radek Hoferek | 9/10 | 5849 days | 1% |
| Pam K | 10/10 | 5852 days | 1% |
| Sabine Locker | 10/10 | 5869 days | 1% |
| csziegler | 10/10 | 5899 days | 1% |
| Rankers Rocks | 10/10 | 5915 days | 1% |
| Tait Suridge | 8/10 | 5926 days | 1% |
| Becca1 | 9/10 | 6161 days | 1% |
| Barry Treve | 9/10 | 6166 days | 1% |
| AnjaChrist | 10/10 | 6177 days | 1% |
| qofd | 10/10 | 6860 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
0.31% 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.