Hi, 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
96.45%
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 | 278 days | 100% |
| Nick | 9/10 | 2894 days | 3% |
| Mike Dw | 10/10 | 2951 days | 3% |
| Nicole Kasischke | 10/10 | 2957 days | 3% |
| Heather Flanders | 8/10 | 3176 days | 2% |
| Melanie and Pascal | 8/10 | 3203 days | 2% |
| Sebastian and Johanna | 9/10 | 3212 days | 2% |
| Tereza Bulova | 9/10 | 3231 days | 2% |
| Bernd Giermann | 8/10 | 3250 days | 2% |
| Magdalena | 7/10 | 3275 days | 2% |
| Kayla | 10/10 | 3294 days | 2% |
| Sean | 10/10 | 3294 days | 2% |
| Louis Nilsson | 10/10 | 3296 days | 2% |
| Lene Nilsson | 10/10 | 3296 days | 2% |
| Janina | 10/10 | 3301 days | 2% |
| Evelyn Rloeh | 7/10 | 3302 days | 2% |
| Gio Zy | 8/10 | 3305 days | 2% |
| Kirsty Smith | 10/10 | 3321 days | 2% |
| Huon | 8/10 | 3538 days | 2% |
| Ana Coulee | 9/10 | 3539 days | 2% |
| Cecile Santiaux | 10/10 | 3539 days | 2% |
| Molly Bogeberg | 9/10 | 3544 days | 2% |
| Jenna Kuittinen | 8/10 | 3545 days | 2% |
| Ben Keiser | 10/10 | 3546 days | 2% |
| Tom Teuber | 10/10 | 3548 days | 2% |
| Anika Danits | 10/10 | 3548 days | 2% |
| Valerie Bernardini | 10/10 | 3554 days | 2% |
| Dan Ramsl | 10/10 | 3559 days | 2% |
| Lauren Dinnage | 10/10 | 3565 days | 2% |
| Patrick Thumeyer | 10/10 | 3565 days | 2% |
| Max | 10/10 | 3566 days | 2% |
| John and Jan | 9/10 | 3567 days | 2% |
| Volker Stroenisch | 10/10 | 3571 days | 2% |
| Josh Symons | 10/10 | 3572 days | 2% |
| Emily Garside | 10/10 | 3573 days | 2% |
| Chandra Macraigne | 7/10 | 3573 days | 1% |
| Horitz | 10/10 | 3578 days | 2% |
| Dani | 10/10 | 3578 days | 2% |
| Lee Sandberg | 8/10 | 3583 days | 2% |
| Tina Rust | 10/10 | 3584 days | 2% |
| William Lendway | 9/10 | 3585 days | 2% |
| Sophie Kalnymsky | 10/10 | 3586 days | 2% |
| Xavier Bistodeau | 10/10 | 3590 days | 2% |
| Quinn McCusker | 10/10 | 3594 days | 2% |
| Maria and Grace | 6/10 | 3596 days | 1% |
| Maria Brauherr | 10/10 | 3597 days | 2% |
| Veronique Kaplan | 10/10 | 3598 days | 2% |
| Christine Schtenker | 10/10 | 3601 days | 2% |
| Kristyna Mokrackoua | 9/10 | 3603 days | 2% |
| Florian Mueller | 10/10 | 3605 days | 2% |
| Anna | 10/10 | 3605 days | 2% |
| Iris Kerbler | 10/10 | 3609 days | 2% |
| Livia and Dave | 10/10 | 3611 days | 2% |
| Elisabeth Grabner | 7/10 | 3612 days | 1% |
| Christian Reimund | 9/10 | 3614 days | 2% |
| Stefanie Giese | 10/10 | 3614 days | 2% |
| Kim and Leon | 10/10 | 3618 days | 2% |
| Matthew Hallowell | 10/10 | 3622 days | 2% |
| Justin Kechanski | 8/10 | 3640 days | 1% |
| Steffen and Johannes | 9/10 | 3644 days | 1% |
| Ixtaso Roncal | 10/10 | 3689 days | 1% |
| Naelan Le Borgue | 10/10 | 3921 days | 1% |
| Oliver Pester | 10/10 | 3931 days | 1% |
| Kristina M | 10/10 | 3959 days | 1% |
| Bes | 10/10 | 3964 days | 1% |
| Inge van Noorf | 10/10 | 4018 days | 1% |
| FlyingKiwiGirl | 10/10 | 4112 days | 1% |
| Caroline Jonsson | 10/10 | 4264 days | 0% |
| Jonny Ronnblom | 10/10 | 4264 days | 0% |
| Martin Buchta | 9/10 | 4296 days | 0% |
| Anne Haenchen | 9/10 | 4296 days | 0% |
| Markus | 10/10 | 4307 days | 0% |
| Cornelia Witte | 10/10 | 4307 days | 0% |
| Sarah | 10/10 | 4320 days | 0% |
| Mike Majnik | 10/10 | 4320 days | 0% |
| Pioter Jurkowski | 10/10 | 4355 days | 0% |
| Patrick | 8/10 | 4355 days | 0% |
| Emma | 7/10 | 4355 days | 0% |
| Christin Woelk | 10/10 | 4625 days | 1% |
| Patrick Stoeit | 10/10 | 4635 days | 1% |
| Pete Wilson | 10/10 | 4647 days | 1% |
| Yu-Ti Chu | 9/10 | 4652 days | 1% |
| Alice Berg | 10/10 | 4654 days | 1% |
| Camille Coombes | 9/10 | 4654 days | 1% |
| Jan | 10/10 | 4661 days | 1% |
| Frederic Birke | 10/10 | 4663 days | 1% |
| Glenn Surzur | 8/10 | 4663 days | 1% |
| Caderet | 10/10 | 4663 days | 1% |
| Jan & Jile | 10/10 | 4666 days | 1% |
| Lars Schulz | 10/10 | 4676 days | 1% |
| N smith | 10/10 | 4720 days | 1% |
| Michael Kretzschmar | 10/10 | 4737 days | 1% |
| Tanja Rudolf | 10/10 | 4739 days | 1% |
| Peter Adams | 9/10 | 5020 days | 1% |
| Martin Guillaume | 10/10 | 5022 days | 1% |
| Jeroen Bartos | 9/10 | 5039 days | 1% |
| Jon Winter | 9/10 | 5041 days | 1% |
| Roeland Driessen | 10/10 | 5086 days | 1% |
| Rachel_Flowers | 10/10 | 5117 days | 1% |
| Sid | 10/10 | 5147 days | 1% |
| Alibeare | 10/10 | 5178 days | 1% |
| Susannah Eduart | 10/10 | 5372 days | 1% |
| Ann-Katrine & Sille | 10/10 | 5390 days | 1% |
| Josef & Christine Evers | 9/10 | 5401 days | 1% |
| Petersen | 10/10 | 5413 days | 1% |
| Gerry Nichols | 10/10 | 5415 days | 1% |
| Helen T | 10/10 | 5726 days | 1% |
| Bob Lenihan | 10/10 | 5743 days | 1% |
| Radek Hoferek | 9/10 | 5781 days | 1% |
| Pam K | 10/10 | 5784 days | 1% |
| Sabine Locker | 10/10 | 5801 days | 1% |
| csziegler | 10/10 | 5831 days | 1% |
| Rankers Rocks | 10/10 | 5847 days | 1% |
| Tait Suridge | 8/10 | 5858 days | 1% |
| Becca1 | 9/10 | 6093 days | 1% |
| Barry Treve | 9/10 | 6098 days | 1% |
| AnjaChrist | 10/10 | 6109 days | 1% |
| qofd | 10/10 | 6792 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.