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 Wellington Botanic Gardens.
If you have any questions or comments about our ranking score calculation please get in touch at email@example.com. We don't believe this is perfect or complete so we're always interested in ways we might make improvements.
70 Valid Reviews
The Wellington Botanic Gardens experience has a total of 70 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 70 valid reviews:
The raw data average (mean) for all the Wellington Botanic Gardens valid reviews is 86.00% and is based on 70 valid reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here as a comparison to the weighted average.
61 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.
Within the 70 valid reviews, the experience has 61 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 61 face-to-face reviews:
The raw data average (mean) for all the Wellington Botanic Gardens face-to-face reviews is 85.90% and is based on 61 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
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.
|Mike Fricker||10/10||652 days||36.1||100%|
|Helna Saumanova||10/10||1280 days||4.64||13%|
|Sabrina and Hannes||9/10||1347 days||4.51||12%|
|Selma Franke||9/10||1351 days||4.5||12%|
|Su Jung Han||10/10||1571 days||4.07||11%|
|Hector Sharp||7/10||1572 days||3.7||10%|
|Paul Gaylon||10/10||1592 days||4.03||11%|
|Adam Pulkrabek||8/10||1600 days||3.81||11%|
|Olga Barathova||9/10||1600 days||4.01||11%|
|Melissa Fuster||7/10||1637 days||3.58||10%|
|renee verwey||9/10||1644 days||3.93||11%|
|Bob Fontaine||7/10||1770 days||3.35||9%|
|Melvin Spear||9/10||1975 days||3.28||9%|
|Manuela Opprecht||10/10||2001 days||3.23||9%|
|Sam Bruylant||9/10||2312 days||2.62||7%|
|Vera Kreipe||8/10||2332 days||2.45||7%|
|Jennifer Garner||10/10||2340 days||2.56||7%|
|Frederic Gazzarin||9/10||2351 days||2.54||7%|
|Patricia Gazzarin||10/10||2351 days||2.54||7%|
|Ruth Watkin||9/10||2351 days||2.54||7%|
|Julia Bonisch||7/10||2370 days||2.28||6%|
|Anne and John||9/10||2781 days||1.7||5%|
|Jen Sweeting||8/10||3044 days||1.13||3%|
|Duncan Mallison||7/10||3063 days||1.05||3%|
|Richard Sutherland||5/10||3066 days||0.93||3%|
|Graham Platt||8/10||3066 days||1.09||3%|
|R E Webb||9/10||3069 days||1.14||3%|
|Diana Allan||9/10||3073 days||1.13||3%|
|Graham Swinyard||7/10||3080 days||1.02||3%|
|hendrik king||7/10||3148 days||0.89||2%|
|Steve Eley||9/10||3157 days||0.96||3%|
|Willem & Lilian||8/10||3157 days||0.92||3%|
|Herman Plasman||8/10||3163 days||0.91||3%|
|R & M Willows||10/10||3165 days||0.95||3%|
|Elke & Charlotte||7/10||3168 days||0.86||2%|
|Malcolm Jones||8/10||3416 days||0.44||1%|
|Kimberly St Louis||10/10||3437 days||0.42||1%|
|Claire Hoyland||8/10||3438 days||0.39||1%|
|Cara Dungay||7/10||3439 days||0.38||1%|
|John Allen||9/10||3446 days||0.4||1%|
|John Simpson||8/10||3448 days||0.38||1%|
|Susan & Richard||10/10||3791 days||0.0||0%|
|Henrik Plichta||8/10||3797 days||0.0||0%|
|Jess Laver||9/10||3801 days||0.0||0%|
|Robb Howland||9/10||3812 days||0.0||0%|
|Bram-Jan M||8/10||3815 days||0.0||0%|
|Nigel Armstrong||9/10||3827 days||0.0||0%|
|Christian Troendle||9/10||4128 days||0.0||0%|
Several adjustments to the weighted average may be added to improve relevancy and credibility. Wellington Botanic Gardens does not meet the criteria for any of these adjustments to apply.
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 firstname.lastname@example.org.