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.
121 Valid Reviews
The The Pines experience has a total of 127 reviews. There are 121 valid reviews that are included when calculating the ranking score and 6 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 121 valid reviews:
The raw data average (mean) for all the The Pines valid reviews is 95.45% and is based on 121 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 121 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.
|Patrizia Tosetti||10/10||139 days||96.94||97%|
|Wazza Schulz||3/10||170 days||73.47||73%|
|Marcus Andrade||10/10||229 days||91.69||92%|
|laura hatton||10/10||229 days||91.69||92%|
|Paula G||8/10||260 days||84.82||84%|
|TT Tang||9/10||321 days||83.67||83%|
|Eddy P||10/10||351 days||80.48||80%|
|Claire Desat||10/10||351 days||80.48||80%|
|Margaret Kajewski||10/10||351 days||80.48||80%|
|Jenna webber||10/10||351 days||80.48||80%|
|Holly Bartholomew||10/10||351 days||80.48||80%|
|J wells||10/10||351 days||80.48||80%|
|Tristan & Jolie||10/10||535 days||54.64||54%|
|Jill Grimwood||10/10||555 days||51.21||50%|
|Jill McGrath||9/10||558 days||50.7||49%|
|Niall McGrath||10/10||565 days||49.51||48%|
|Nick Cartmell||10/10||568 days||49.01||48%|
|Robert Webster||10/10||572 days||48.34||47%|
|Luis Vigil Vidal||9/10||577 days||47.52||46%|
|Tina I||10/10||625 days||40.0||38%|
|Maggie Konstanski||9/10||626 days||39.86||38%|
|Paul and Paula||8/10||630 days||37.3||36%|
|Joe Trigg||9/10||673 days||33.22||32%|
|Phil and Mel Rowson||9/10||674 days||33.09||31%|
|Gary Prescot||10/10||688 days||31.25||30%|
|Tom Sanft||9/10||819 days||17.07||15%|
|Cathy Mead||10/10||892 days||11.53||9%|
|Nikolaj Lambertsen||10/10||897 days||11.21||9%|
|deborah cooper||8/10||900 days||10.47||8%|
|Niels Petit||10/10||917 days||10.02||8%|
|Craig Eagleton||10/10||933 days||9.16||7%|
|Florence Boinay||10/10||934 days||9.11||7%|
|Breanna Alexander||10/10||948 days||8.42||6%|
|Trent O'Keeffe||10/10||949 days||8.38||6%|
|Peter Brock||10/10||952 days||8.24||6%|
|sara hoeflaken||10/10||956 days||8.06||6%|
|Erich Brueggermann||9/10||957 days||8.02||6%|
|The Beans||10/10||1018 days||5.94||4%|
|Richard Houghton||10/10||1020 days||5.89||4%|
|Jude Ong||10/10||1020 days||5.89||4%|
|Alf Caruana||8/10||1020 days||5.6||3%|
|Olivia Swisher||10/10||1036 days||5.55||3%|
|Dylan McBride||10/10||1036 days||5.55||3%|
|Anna Dalby||10/10||1037 days||5.53||3%|
|Theo Mallais||10/10||1041 days||5.46||3%|
|Derek Drost||8/10||1055 days||4.99||3%|
|Kevin Mayer||10/10||1112 days||4.97||3%|
|Rita Ashby||6/10||1173 days||4.05||2%|
|Pamela Hoffman||10/10||1226 days||4.8||2%|
|Justin Caldwell||10/10||1249 days||4.77||2%|
|Dennis Page||10/10||1265 days||4.74||2%|
|Gilles Andrieu||8/10||1275 days||4.49||2%|
|Antonio BENITEZ||10/10||1325 days||4.65||2%|
|Richard Kirby||10/10||1356 days||4.6||2%|
|Renee Willhuber||10/10||1359 days||4.6||2%|
|Antoine Germaine||9/10||1371 days||4.58||2%|
|Kaseylee Hibbert||10/10||1390 days||4.55||2%|
|Karmen Bond||10/10||1414 days||4.51||2%|
|Steve Warren||10/10||1417 days||4.51||2%|
|Mitchell Henderson||8/10||1476 days||4.2||2%|
|Ian Gilbert||10/10||1539 days||4.32||2%|
|Oliver Pester||10/10||1631 days||4.18||2%|
|Andrew Jones||10/10||1631 days||4.18||2%|
|Mike Merrick||9/10||1638 days||4.17||2%|
|Averil Brown||10/10||1656 days||4.15||2%|
|Nell Hearle||10/10||1666 days||4.13||2%|
|Patrick Schwerhoff||10/10||1683 days||4.11||2%|
|Manolis Pavlakis||10/10||1690 days||4.09||2%|
|Ron Clarke||10/10||1721 days||4.05||2%|
|Alexandre Moleiro||10/10||1721 days||4.05||2%|
|John Scott||10/10||1731 days||4.03||2%|
|Kane F||10/10||1812 days||3.91||1%|
|Scott Atkinson||10/10||1874 days||3.81||1%|
|Andrew Kermode||10/10||1874 days||3.81||1%|
|Tom Guthknecht||9/10||1959 days||3.68||1%|
|Matt Weston||10/10||1979 days||3.65||1%|
|tracey aylmer||9/10||1996 days||3.63||1%|
|Julian Kemp||9/10||2116 days||3.45||1%|
|Karen Perry||10/10||2177 days||3.35||1%|
|Fernando Martin||9/10||2368 days||3.06||1%|
|Tinne Cis||10/10||2723 days||2.52||0%|
|Chris Marsh||10/10||2752 days||2.48||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.