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 The Pines.
If you have any questions or comments about our ranking score calculation please get in touch at firstname.lastname@example.org. We don't believe this is perfect or complete so we're always interested in ways we might make improvements.
104 Valid Reviews
The The Pines experience has a total of 108 reviews. There are 104 valid reviews that are included when calculating the ranking score and 4 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 104 valid reviews:
The raw data average (mean) for all the The Pines valid reviews is 95.77% and is based on 104 valid reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here as a comparison to the weighted average.
15 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 104 valid reviews, the experience has 15 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 15 face-to-face reviews:
The raw data average (mean) for all the The Pines face-to-face reviews is 97.33% and is based on 15 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.
|Paula G||8/10||49 days||99.62||100%|
|TT Tang||9/10||110 days||98.08||98%|
|Eddy P||10/10||140 days||96.89||97%|
|Claire Desat||10/10||140 days||96.89||97%|
|Margaret Kajewski||10/10||140 days||96.89||97%|
|Jenna webber||10/10||140 days||96.89||97%|
|Holly Bartholomew||10/10||140 days||96.89||97%|
|J wells||10/10||140 days||96.89||97%|
|Tristan & Jolie||10/10||324 days||83.37||83%|
|Jill Grimwood||10/10||344 days||97.5||98%|
|Jill McGrath||9/10||347 days||97.1||97%|
|Niall McGrath||10/10||354 days||80.14||80%|
|Nick Cartmell||10/10||357 days||95.77||96%|
|Robert Webster||10/10||361 days||79.35||79%|
|Luis Vigil Vidal||9/10||366 days||94.53||95%|
|Tina I||10/10||414 days||72.84||72%|
|Maggie Konstanski||9/10||415 days||72.71||72%|
|Paul and Paula||8/10||419 days||72.18||71%|
|Joe Trigg||9/10||462 days||66.18||65%|
|Phil and Mel Rowson||9/10||463 days||66.03||65%|
|Gary Prescot||10/10||477 days||63.95||63%|
|Tom Sanft||9/10||608 days||42.58||41%|
|Cathy Mead||10/10||681 days||32.16||30%|
|Nikolaj Lambertsen||10/10||686 days||31.51||29%|
|deborah cooper||8/10||688 days||31.25||29%|
|Niels Petit||10/10||706 days||28.98||26%|
|Craig Eagleton||10/10||722 days||27.05||24%|
|Florence Boinay||10/10||723 days||26.93||24%|
|Breanna Alexander||10/10||737 days||25.31||23%|
|Trent O'Keeffe||10/10||738 days||25.2||22%|
|Peter Brock||10/10||741 days||24.86||22%|
|sara hoeflaken||10/10||745 days||24.41||22%|
|Erich Brueggermann||9/10||746 days||24.3||22%|
|The Beans||10/10||807 days||18.14||15%|
|Richard Houghton||10/10||808 days||18.05||15%|
|Jude Ong||10/10||808 days||18.05||15%|
|Alf Caruana||8/10||809 days||17.96||15%|
|Olivia Swisher||10/10||825 days||19.86||17%|
|Dylan McBride||10/10||825 days||19.86||17%|
|Anna Dalby||10/10||826 days||19.76||17%|
|Theo Mallais||10/10||830 days||16.13||13%|
|Derek Drost||8/10||844 days||14.98||12%|
|Kevin Mayer||10/10||900 days||11.03||8%|
|Rita Ashby||6/10||961 days||7.85||4%|
|Pamela Hoffman||10/10||1015 days||6.01||2%|
|Justin Caldwell||10/10||1038 days||5.51||2%|
|Dennis Page||10/10||1053 days||5.28||2%|
|Gilles Andrieu||8/10||1064 days||5.15||2%|
|Antonio BENITEZ||10/10||1113 days||4.98||1%|
|Richard Kirby||10/10||1144 days||4.93||1%|
|Renee Willhuber||10/10||1148 days||4.93||1%|
|Antoine Germaine||9/10||1160 days||4.91||1%|
|Kaseylee Hibbert||10/10||1179 days||4.88||1%|
|Karmen Bond||10/10||1203 days||4.85||1%|
|Steve Warren||10/10||1205 days||4.85||1%|
|Mitchell Henderson||8/10||1265 days||4.77||1%|
|Ian Gilbert||10/10||1327 days||4.68||1%|
|Oliver Pester||10/10||1419 days||4.56||1%|
|Andrew Jones||10/10||1419 days||4.56||1%|
|Mike Merrick||9/10||1427 days||4.55||1%|
|Averil Brown||10/10||1445 days||4.52||1%|
|Nell Hearle||10/10||1455 days||4.51||1%|
|Patrick Schwerhoff||10/10||1472 days||4.48||1%|
|Manolis Pavlakis||10/10||1478 days||4.48||1%|
|Ron Clarke||10/10||1509 days||4.43||1%|
|Alexandre Moleiro||10/10||1509 days||4.43||1%|
|John Scott||10/10||1520 days||5.3||2%|
|Kane F||10/10||1600 days||4.31||1%|
|Scott Atkinson||10/10||1663 days||4.22||1%|
|Andi Kermode||10/10||1663 days||4.22||1%|
|Tom Guthknecht||9/10||1748 days||4.93||1%|
|Matt Weston||10/10||1768 days||4.89||1%|
|tracey aylmer||9/10||1785 days||4.05||0%|
|Julian Kemp||9/10||1905 days||3.89||0%|
|Karen Perry||10/10||1966 days||3.81||0%|
|Fernando Martin||9/10||2157 days||4.25||1%|
|Tinne Cis||10/10||2512 days||3.67||0%|
|Chris Marsh||10/10||2541 days||3.62||0%|
Several adjustments to the weighted average may be added to improve relevancy and credibility. The Pines 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 email@example.com.