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
94.05%
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 | 114 days | 97.94 | 100% | |
| Christie Duncan | 10/10 | 357 days | 79.8 | 81% | |
| Hamish Wedd | 10/10 | 509 days | 58.95 | 60% | |
| Matthew Hall | 10/10 | 595 days | 44.62 | 45% | |
| Dan Coates | 9/10 | 891 days |  |
11.59 | 11% |
| Fabien Dussarrat | 9/10 | 893 days | |
11.47 | 11% |
| Walter van der Eng | 9/10 | 894 days | |
11.4 | 11% |
| Mael Ouron | 9/10 | 898 days | |
11.15 | 11% |
| Moe Bouchard | 9/10 | 898 days | |
11.15 | 11% |
| Jessica and Henry | 10/10 | 903 days | |
10.84 | 10% |
| Fentrup | 8/10 | 914 days | |
9.68 | 9% |
| Rashi Birla | 10/10 | 919 days | |
9.91 | 9% |
| Katie and Rob | 9/10 | 921 days | |
9.8 | 9% |
| Christer Moberg | 10/10 | 926 days | |
9.53 | 9% |
| Liam Elferins | 10/10 | 935 days | |
9.06 | 9% |
| Xander | 10/10 | 935 days | |
9.06 | 9% |
| Alice Ormandy | 9/10 | 949 days | |
8.38 | 8% |
| Sam Howard | 6/10 | 955 days | |
6.73 | 6% |
| Amy Smith | 8/10 | 955 days | |
7.7 | 7% |
| Simon | 8/10 | 956 days | |
7.66 | 7% |
| Cornelia Timm | 9/10 | 958 days | |
7.97 | 7% |
| Clementine | 9/10 | 977 days | |
7.21 | 7% |
| Saskia Irblich | 9/10 | 980 days | |
7.1 | 7% |
| Franziska Lobe | 8/10 | 980 days | |
6.74 | 6% |
| Max Mueller | 10/10 | 980 days | |
7.1 | 7% |
| Laura Bellhauser | 9/10 | 980 days | |
7.1 | 7% |
| Chris Schmolz | 10/10 | 992 days | |
6.68 | 6% |
| Colin Fisher | 9/10 | 992 days | |
6.68 | 6% |
| Katrina Sedl | 9/10 | 992 days | |
6.68 | 6% |
| Allie Nertz | 10/10 | 992 days | |
6.68 | 6% |
| Moreno | 10/10 | 995 days | |
6.58 | 6% |
| Lieke vol Velde | 10/10 | 998 days | |
6.49 | 6% |
| Olde Vogel | 9/10 | 998 days | |
6.49 | 6% |
| Bob | 9/10 | 1000 days | |
6.43 | 6% |
| Nicole Joersen | 9/10 | 1004 days | |
6.31 | 6% |
| Matthus Groem | 9/10 | 1004 days | |
6.31 | 6% |
| Maarten | 9/10 | 1007 days | |
6.23 | 6% |
| Jakob Lovdahl | 8/10 | 1011 days | |
5.81 | 5% |
| Lina Kiellamn | 10/10 | 1011 days | |
6.12 | 5% |
| Jonny Horn | 8/10 | 1021 days | |
5.57 | 5% |
| Karine Dransart | 10/10 | 1030 days | |
5.67 | 5% |
| Thomas | 10/10 | 1037 days | |
5.53 | 5% |
| Alix | 10/10 | 1241 days | |
4.78 | 4% |
| Claire | 10/10 | 1241 days | |
4.78 | 4% |
| Lukas Boller | 10/10 | 1243 days | |
4.77 | 4% |
| Max | 10/10 | 1249 days | 4.77 | 4% | |
| Denisa Tuckova | 8/10 | 1250 days | |
4.53 | 4% |
| Lorenz Pfisterer | 10/10 | 1251 days | |
4.76 | 4% |
| Caroline | 10/10 | 1251 days | |
4.76 | 4% |
| Benedikt Maus | 9/10 | 1255 days | |
4.76 | 4% |
| Leonie Kaufmann | 8/10 | 1255 days | |
4.52 | 4% |
| Jonathan Maus | 8/10 | 1256 days | |
4.52 | 4% |
| Daniel Weber | 8/10 | 1257 days | |
4.52 | 4% |
| Lisa Fenzl | 8/10 | 1259 days | |
4.51 | 4% |
| Gessica | 7/10 | 1259 days | |
4.32 | 4% |
| Szu-Yi Hsu | 9/10 | 1261 days | |
4.75 | 4% |
| Chao Lai | 10/10 | 1261 days | |
4.75 | 4% |
| Celine | 6/10 | 1263 days | |
3.94 | 3% |
| Helen Hazelwood | 9/10 | 1266 days | |
4.74 | 4% |
| Ruby Reynolds | 8/10 | 1266 days | |
4.5 | 4% |
| Jana Formankoua | 10/10 | 1266 days | |
4.74 | 4% |
| Brenda Oomen | 8/10 | 1270 days | |
4.5 | 4% |
| Quentin Sauve | 10/10 | 1272 days | |
4.73 | 4% |
| Andrea Le Stunff | 9/10 | 1272 days | |
4.73 | 4% |
| Regina Baum | 10/10 | 1275 days | |
4.73 | 4% |
| Florian Baum | 10/10 | 1275 days | |
4.73 | 4% |
| Joe Rogers | 7/10 | 1275 days | |
4.3 | 4% |
| Annika | 10/10 | 1278 days | |
4.72 | 4% |
| Munne | 8/10 | 1280 days | |
4.48 | 4% |
| Max | 9/10 | 1289 days | |
4.7 | 4% |
| Laurent Petit | 10/10 | 1295 days | 4.7 | 4% | |
| Christoph Herrmann | 7/10 | 1296 days | |
4.27 | 4% |
| Nilles Ullner | 9/10 | 1302 days | |
4.68 | 4% |
| Alyssa Wyer | 6/10 | 1307 days | |
3.88 | 3% |
| Lucile Souday | 10/10 | 1309 days | 4.67 | 4% | |
| Ivan Dupont | 10/10 | 1312 days | |
4.67 | 4% |
| Bonnie Krautz | 9/10 | 1320 days | |
4.66 | 4% |
| Maxim Reim | 9/10 | 1323 days | |
4.65 | 4% |
| Till | 10/10 | 1324 days | |
4.65 | 4% |
| Patrick Edwards | 10/10 | 1346 days | |
4.62 | 4% |
| James Newton | 10/10 | 1358 days | |
4.6 | 4% |
| Lenka Korinkova | 10/10 | 1624 days | |
4.19 | 4% |
| Jiri Benda | 10/10 | 1624 days | |
4.19 | 4% |
| Kristina Farkas | 10/10 | 1652 days | |
4.15 | 3% |
| Barbara | 10/10 | 1710 days | |
4.06 | 3% |
| Shona MacDonald | 10/10 | 1968 days | |
3.67 | 3% |
| Ane Didriksen | 10/10 | 1968 days | |
3.67 | 3% |
| Iris Anette Berger | 10/10 | 1968 days | |
3.67 | 3% |
| Stefanie | 9/10 | 1970 days | |
3.67 | 3% |
| Wouter Vanmoz | 8/10 | 1986 days | |
3.46 | 3% |
| Julian | 9/10 | 1986 days | |
3.64 | 3% |
| Ruud Biemans | 9/10 | 2002 days | |
3.62 | 3% |
| Simon Tanguy | 9/10 | 2021 days | |
3.59 | 3% |
| Johanna Bak | 9/10 | 2049 days | |
3.55 | 3% |
| Tom Somers | 7/10 | 2353 days | |
2.81 | 2% |
| Margaret and Derek McNeil | 10/10 | 2442 days | |
2.95 | 2% |
| M Booty | 9/10 | 2444 days | |
2.95 | 2% |
| Jonathan Vondette | 9/10 | 2448 days | |
2.94 | 2% |
| Lucie | 9/10 | 2462 days | |
2.92 | 2% |
| Martin & Dee Bellarby | 10/10 | 2742 days | |
2.49 | 2% |
| Rocco Christian | 10/10 | 2755 days | |
2.47 | 2% |
| Alex | 9/10 | 3085 days | |
1.97 | 1% |
| Kai Eppink | 7/10 | 3096 days | |
1.78 | 1% |
| Lieve Verdonck | 10/10 | 3099 days | |
1.95 | 1% |
| Carmel | 9/10 | 3102 days | |
1.95 | 1% |
| HighlandLassie | 9/10 | 3126 days | 1.91 | 1% | |
| Einar | 9/10 | 3451 days | |
1.41 | 1% |
| Jana Steve | 10/10 | 3457 days | |
1.4 | 1% |
| Don & Alice | 8/10 | 3467 days | |
1.32 | 1% |
| Michael | 10/10 | 3473 days | |
1.38 | 1% |
| Andrea and Craig Swinson | 10/10 | 3577 days | |
1.22 | 0% |
| Francesca Sabat | 7/10 | 3819 days | |
0.78 | 0% |
| GraceB | 9/10 | 3819 days | |
0.85 | 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
94%
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.