Ranking Score Explained
Hi there, 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 Roys Peak Track.
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.
Roys Peak Track
Valid Reviews
113 Valid Reviews
The Roys Peak Track experience has a total of 113 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 113 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 49 |
|
43% |
| 9/10 | 39 |
|
35% |
| 8/10 | 16 |
|
14% |
| 7/10 | 6 |
|
5% |
| 6/10 | 3 |
|
3% |
| 5/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
91.06% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Roys Peak Track valid reviews is 91.06% and is based on 113 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
105 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 113 valid reviews, the experience has 105 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 105 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 42 |
|
40% |
| 9/10 | 38 |
|
36% |
| 8/10 | 16 |
|
15% |
| 7/10 | 6 |
|
6% |
| 6/10 | 3 |
|
3% |
| 5/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
90.48% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Roys Peak Track face-to-face reviews is 90.48% and is based on 105 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
93.20%
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 | Face-to-Face | Weight | Relative Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Emmanuel Hatzis | 10/10 | 469 days | 65.14 | 100% | |
| Christie Duncan | 10/10 | 711 days | 28.37 | 44% | |
| Hamish Wedd | 10/10 | 864 days | 13.46 | 21% | |
| Matthew Hall | 10/10 | 949 days | 8.38 | 13% | |
| Dan Coates | 9/10 | 1245 days |  |
4.71 | 7% |
| Fabien Dussarrat | 9/10 | 1247 days | |
4.7 | 7% |
| Walter van der Eng | 9/10 | 1248 days | |
4.7 | 7% |
| Mael Ouron | 9/10 | 1252 days | |
4.69 | 7% |
| Moe Bouchard | 9/10 | 1252 days | |
4.69 | 7% |
| Jessica and Henry | 10/10 | 1257 days | |
4.68 | 7% |
| Fentrup | 8/10 | 1268 days | |
4.43 | 7% |
| Rashi Birla | 10/10 | 1273 days | |
4.65 | 7% |
| Katie and Rob | 9/10 | 1275 days | |
4.65 | 7% |
| Christer Moberg | 10/10 | 1280 days | |
4.64 | 7% |
| Liam Elferins | 10/10 | 1289 days | |
4.62 | 7% |
| Xander | 10/10 | 1289 days | |
4.62 | 7% |
| Alice Ormandy | 9/10 | 1303 days | |
4.59 | 7% |
| Sam Howard | 6/10 | 1309 days | |
3.8 | 6% |
| Amy Smith | 8/10 | 1309 days | |
4.35 | 7% |
| Simon | 8/10 | 1310 days | |
4.35 | 7% |
| Cornelia Timm | 9/10 | 1312 days | |
4.58 | 7% |
| Clementine | 9/10 | 1331 days | |
4.54 | 7% |
| Saskia Irblich | 9/10 | 1334 days | |
4.53 | 7% |
| Franziska Lobe | 8/10 | 1334 days | |
4.31 | 7% |
| Max Mueller | 10/10 | 1334 days | |
4.53 | 7% |
| Laura Bellhauser | 9/10 | 1334 days | |
4.53 | 7% |
| Chris Schmolz | 10/10 | 1346 days | |
4.51 | 7% |
| Colin Fisher | 9/10 | 1346 days | |
4.51 | 7% |
| Katrina Sedl | 9/10 | 1346 days | |
4.51 | 7% |
| Allie Nertz | 10/10 | 1346 days | |
4.51 | 7% |
| Moreno | 10/10 | 1349 days | |
4.5 | 7% |
| Lieke vol Velde | 10/10 | 1352 days | |
4.5 | 7% |
| Olde Vogel | 9/10 | 1352 days | |
4.5 | 7% |
| Bob | 9/10 | 1354 days | |
4.49 | 7% |
| Nicole Joersen | 9/10 | 1358 days | |
4.49 | 7% |
| Matthus Groem | 9/10 | 1358 days | |
4.49 | 7% |
| Maarten | 9/10 | 1361 days | |
4.48 | 7% |
| Jakob Lovdahl | 8/10 | 1365 days | |
4.25 | 7% |
| Lina Kiellamn | 10/10 | 1365 days | |
4.47 | 7% |
| Jonny Horn | 8/10 | 1375 days | |
4.23 | 6% |
| Karine Dransart | 10/10 | 1384 days | |
4.43 | 7% |
| Thomas | 10/10 | 1391 days | |
4.42 | 7% |
| Alix | 10/10 | 1595 days | |
4.02 | 6% |
| Claire | 10/10 | 1595 days | |
4.02 | 6% |
| Lukas Boller | 10/10 | 1597 days | |
4.02 | 6% |
| Max | 10/10 | 1603 days | 4.01 | 6% | |
| Denisa Tuckova | 8/10 | 1604 days | |
3.8 | 6% |
| Lorenz Pfisterer | 10/10 | 1605 days | |
4.0 | 6% |
| Caroline | 10/10 | 1605 days | |
4.0 | 6% |
| Benedikt Maus | 9/10 | 1609 days | |
3.99 | 6% |
| Leonie Kaufmann | 8/10 | 1609 days | |
3.79 | 6% |
| Jonathan Maus | 8/10 | 1610 days | |
3.79 | 6% |
| Daniel Weber | 8/10 | 1611 days | |
3.79 | 6% |
| Lisa Fenzl | 8/10 | 1613 days | |
3.79 | 6% |
| Gessica | 7/10 | 1613 days | |
3.63 | 6% |
| Szu-Yi Hsu | 9/10 | 1615 days | |
3.98 | 6% |
| Chao Lai | 10/10 | 1615 days | |
3.98 | 6% |
| Celine | 6/10 | 1617 days | |
3.3 | 5% |
| Helen Hazelwood | 9/10 | 1620 days | |
3.97 | 6% |
| Ruby Reynolds | 8/10 | 1620 days | |
3.77 | 6% |
| Jana Formankoua | 10/10 | 1620 days | |
3.97 | 6% |
| Brenda Oomen | 8/10 | 1624 days | |
3.77 | 6% |
| Quentin Sauve | 10/10 | 1626 days | |
3.96 | 6% |
| Andrea Le Stunff | 9/10 | 1626 days | |
3.96 | 6% |
| Regina Baum | 10/10 | 1629 days | |
3.95 | 6% |
| Florian Baum | 10/10 | 1629 days | |
3.95 | 6% |
| Joe Rogers | 7/10 | 1629 days | |
3.6 | 6% |
| Annika | 10/10 | 1632 days | |
3.95 | 6% |
| Munne | 8/10 | 1634 days | |
3.75 | 6% |
| Max | 9/10 | 1643 days | |
3.93 | 6% |
| Laurent Petit | 10/10 | 1649 days | 3.92 | 6% | |
| Christoph Herrmann | 7/10 | 1650 days | |
3.56 | 5% |
| Nilles Ullner | 9/10 | 1656 days | |
3.9 | 6% |
| Alyssa Wyer | 6/10 | 1661 days | |
3.23 | 5% |
| Lucile Souday | 10/10 | 1663 days | 3.89 | 6% | |
| Ivan Dupont | 10/10 | 1666 days | |
3.88 | 6% |
| Bonnie Krautz | 9/10 | 1674 days | |
3.87 | 6% |
| Maxim Reim | 9/10 | 1677 days | |
3.86 | 6% |
| Till | 10/10 | 1678 days | |
3.86 | 6% |
| Patrick Edwards | 10/10 | 1700 days | |
3.82 | 6% |
| James Newton | 10/10 | 1712 days | |
3.79 | 6% |
| Lenka Korinkova | 10/10 | 1978 days | |
3.27 | 5% |
| Jiri Benda | 10/10 | 1978 days | |
3.27 | 5% |
| Kristina Farkas | 10/10 | 2006 days | |
3.22 | 5% |
| Barbara | 10/10 | 2064 days | |
3.1 | 5% |
| Shona MacDonald | 10/10 | 2322 days | |
2.6 | 4% |
| Ane Didriksen | 10/10 | 2322 days | |
2.6 | 4% |
| Iris Anette Berger | 10/10 | 2322 days | |
2.6 | 4% |
| Stefanie | 9/10 | 2324 days | |
2.59 | 4% |
| Wouter Vanmoz | 8/10 | 2340 days | |
2.44 | 4% |
| Julian | 9/10 | 2340 days | |
2.56 | 4% |
| Ruud Biemans | 9/10 | 2356 days | |
2.53 | 4% |
| Simon Tanguy | 9/10 | 2375 days | |
2.5 | 4% |
| Johanna Bak | 9/10 | 2403 days | |
2.44 | 4% |
| Tom Somers | 7/10 | 2707 days | |
1.68 | 3% |
| Margaret and Derek McNeil | 10/10 | 2796 days | |
1.67 | 3% |
| M Booty | 9/10 | 2798 days | |
1.67 | 3% |
| Jonathan Vondette | 9/10 | 2802 days | |
1.66 | 3% |
| Lucie | 9/10 | 2816 days | |
1.63 | 3% |
| Martin & Dee Bellarby | 10/10 | 3096 days | |
1.08 | 2% |
| Rocco Christian | 10/10 | 3109 days | |
1.06 | 2% |
| Alex | 9/10 | 3439 days | |
0.41 | 1% |
| Kai Eppink | 7/10 | 3450 days | |
0.36 | 1% |
| Lieve Verdonck | 10/10 | 3453 days | |
0.39 | 1% |
| Carmel | 9/10 | 3456 days | |
0.38 | 1% |
| HighlandLassie | 9/10 | 3480 days | 0.33 | 1% | |
| Einar | 9/10 | 3805 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| Jana Steve | 10/10 | 3811 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| Don & Alice | 8/10 | 3821 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| Michael | 10/10 | 3827 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| Andrea and Craig Swinson | 10/10 | 3931 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| Francesca Sabat | 7/10 | 4173 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| GraceB | 9/10 | 4173 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
Adjustments
No Adjustment
Several adjustments to the weighted average may be added to improve relevancy and credibility. Roys Peak Track does not meet the criteria for any of these adjustments to apply.
Final Ranking Score
93%
The final ranking score once rounding has been applied. This value is cached and recalculated each day. Therefore it may not be precisely accurate based on the other values presented.
If you have any questions or comments about our ranking score calculation please get in touch at info@rankers.co.nz.