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
96.34%
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 | 314 days | 100% |
| Nick | 9/10 | 2930 days | 3% |
| Mike Dw | 10/10 | 2987 days | 3% |
| Nicole Kasischke | 10/10 | 2993 days | 3% |
| Heather Flanders | 8/10 | 3212 days | 2% |
| Melanie and Pascal | 8/10 | 3239 days | 2% |
| Sebastian and Johanna | 9/10 | 3248 days | 2% |
| Tereza Bulova | 9/10 | 3267 days | 2% |
| Bernd Giermann | 8/10 | 3286 days | 2% |
| Magdalena | 7/10 | 3311 days | 2% |
| Kayla | 10/10 | 3330 days | 2% |
| Sean | 10/10 | 3330 days | 2% |
| Louis Nilsson | 10/10 | 3332 days | 2% |
| Lene Nilsson | 10/10 | 3332 days | 2% |
| Janina | 10/10 | 3337 days | 2% |
| Evelyn Rloeh | 7/10 | 3338 days | 2% |
| Gio Zy | 8/10 | 3341 days | 2% |
| Kirsty Smith | 10/10 | 3357 days | 2% |
| Huon | 8/10 | 3574 days | 2% |
| Ana Coulee | 9/10 | 3575 days | 2% |
| Cecile Santiaux | 10/10 | 3575 days | 2% |
| Molly Bogeberg | 9/10 | 3580 days | 2% |
| Jenna Kuittinen | 8/10 | 3581 days | 2% |
| Ben Keiser | 10/10 | 3582 days | 2% |
| Tom Teuber | 10/10 | 3584 days | 2% |
| Anika Danits | 10/10 | 3584 days | 2% |
| Valerie Bernardini | 10/10 | 3590 days | 2% |
| Dan Ramsl | 10/10 | 3595 days | 2% |
| Lauren Dinnage | 10/10 | 3601 days | 2% |
| Patrick Thumeyer | 10/10 | 3601 days | 2% |
| Max | 10/10 | 3602 days | 2% |
| John and Jan | 9/10 | 3603 days | 2% |
| Volker Stroenisch | 10/10 | 3607 days | 2% |
| Josh Symons | 10/10 | 3608 days | 2% |
| Emily Garside | 10/10 | 3609 days | 2% |
| Chandra Macraigne | 7/10 | 3609 days | 1% |
| Horitz | 10/10 | 3614 days | 2% |
| Dani | 10/10 | 3614 days | 2% |
| Lee Sandberg | 8/10 | 3619 days | 1% |
| Tina Rust | 10/10 | 3620 days | 2% |
| William Lendway | 9/10 | 3621 days | 2% |
| Sophie Kalnymsky | 10/10 | 3622 days | 2% |
| Xavier Bistodeau | 10/10 | 3626 days | 2% |
| Quinn McCusker | 10/10 | 3630 days | 2% |
| Maria and Grace | 6/10 | 3632 days | 1% |
| Maria Brauherr | 10/10 | 3633 days | 1% |
| Veronique Kaplan | 10/10 | 3634 days | 1% |
| Christine Schtenker | 10/10 | 3637 days | 1% |
| Kristyna Mokrackoua | 9/10 | 3639 days | 1% |
| Florian Mueller | 10/10 | 3641 days | 1% |
| Anna | 10/10 | 3641 days | 1% |
| Iris Kerbler | 10/10 | 3645 days | 1% |
| Livia and Dave | 10/10 | 3647 days | 1% |
| Elisabeth Grabner | 7/10 | 3648 days | 1% |
| Christian Reimund | 9/10 | 3650 days | 1% |
| Stefanie Giese | 10/10 | 3650 days | 1% |
| Kim and Leon | 10/10 | 3654 days | 1% |
| Matthew Hallowell | 10/10 | 3658 days | 1% |
| Justin Kechanski | 8/10 | 3676 days | 1% |
| Steffen and Johannes | 9/10 | 3680 days | 1% |
| Ixtaso Roncal | 10/10 | 3725 days | 1% |
| Naelan Le Borgue | 10/10 | 3957 days | 1% |
| Oliver Pester | 10/10 | 3967 days | 1% |
| Kristina M | 10/10 | 3995 days | 1% |
| Bes | 10/10 | 4000 days | 1% |
| Inge van Noorf | 10/10 | 4054 days | 1% |
| FlyingKiwiGirl | 10/10 | 4148 days | 0% |
| Caroline Jonsson | 10/10 | 4300 days | 0% |
| Jonny Ronnblom | 10/10 | 4300 days | 0% |
| Martin Buchta | 9/10 | 4332 days | 0% |
| Anne Haenchen | 9/10 | 4332 days | 0% |
| Markus | 10/10 | 4343 days | 0% |
| Cornelia Witte | 10/10 | 4343 days | 0% |
| Sarah | 10/10 | 4356 days | 0% |
| Mike Majnik | 10/10 | 4356 days | 0% |
| Pioter Jurkowski | 10/10 | 4391 days | 1% |
| Patrick | 8/10 | 4391 days | 1% |
| Emma | 7/10 | 4391 days | 1% |
| Christin Woelk | 10/10 | 4661 days | 1% |
| Patrick Stoeit | 10/10 | 4671 days | 1% |
| Pete Wilson | 10/10 | 4683 days | 1% |
| Yu-Ti Chu | 9/10 | 4688 days | 1% |
| Alice Berg | 10/10 | 4690 days | 1% |
| Camille Coombes | 9/10 | 4690 days | 1% |
| Jan | 10/10 | 4697 days | 1% |
| Frederic Birke | 10/10 | 4699 days | 1% |
| Glenn Surzur | 8/10 | 4699 days | 1% |
| Caderet | 10/10 | 4699 days | 1% |
| Jan & Jile | 10/10 | 4702 days | 1% |
| Lars Schulz | 10/10 | 4712 days | 1% |
| N smith | 10/10 | 4756 days | 1% |
| Michael Kretzschmar | 10/10 | 4773 days | 1% |
| Tanja Rudolf | 10/10 | 4775 days | 1% |
| Peter Adams | 9/10 | 5056 days | 1% |
| Martin Guillaume | 10/10 | 5058 days | 1% |
| Jeroen Bartos | 9/10 | 5075 days | 1% |
| Jon Winter | 9/10 | 5077 days | 1% |
| Roeland Driessen | 10/10 | 5122 days | 1% |
| Rachel_Flowers | 10/10 | 5153 days | 1% |
| Sid | 10/10 | 5183 days | 1% |
| Alibeare | 10/10 | 5214 days | 1% |
| Susannah Eduart | 10/10 | 5408 days | 1% |
| Ann-Katrine & Sille | 10/10 | 5426 days | 1% |
| Josef & Christine Evers | 9/10 | 5437 days | 1% |
| Petersen | 10/10 | 5449 days | 1% |
| Gerry Nichols | 10/10 | 5451 days | 1% |
| Helen T | 10/10 | 5762 days | 1% |
| Bob Lenihan | 10/10 | 5779 days | 1% |
| Radek Hoferek | 9/10 | 5817 days | 1% |
| Pam K | 10/10 | 5820 days | 1% |
| Sabine Locker | 10/10 | 5837 days | 1% |
| csziegler | 10/10 | 5867 days | 1% |
| Rankers Rocks | 10/10 | 5883 days | 1% |
| Tait Suridge | 8/10 | 5894 days | 1% |
| Becca1 | 9/10 | 6129 days | 1% |
| Barry Treve | 9/10 | 6134 days | 1% |
| AnjaChrist | 10/10 | 6145 days | 1% |
| qofd | 10/10 | 6828 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.