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 Lake Wanaka i-SITE Visitor Information Centre.
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.
Nick Morrison
Rankers owner
Lake Wanaka i-SITE Visitor Information Centre
Valid Reviews
66 Valid Reviews
The Lake Wanaka i-SITE Visitor Information Centre experience has a total of 67 reviews. There are 66 valid reviews that are included when calculating the ranking score and 1 invalid review 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 66 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 21 |
|
32% |
| 9/10 | 14 |
|
21% |
| 8/10 | 15 |
|
23% |
| 7/10 | 8 |
|
12% |
| 6/10 | 2 |
|
3% |
| 5/10 | 2 |
|
3% |
| 4/10 | 2 |
|
3% |
| 3/10 | 1 |
|
2% |
| 2/10 | 1 |
|
2% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
82.88% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Lake Wanaka i-SITE Visitor Information Centre valid reviews is 82.88% and is based on 66 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
63 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 66 valid reviews, the experience has 63 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 63 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 19 |
|
30% |
| 9/10 | 14 |
|
22% |
| 8/10 | 14 |
|
22% |
| 7/10 | 8 |
|
13% |
| 6/10 | 2 |
|
3% |
| 5/10 | 2 |
|
3% |
| 4/10 | 2 |
|
3% |
| 3/10 | 1 |
|
2% |
| 2/10 | 1 |
|
2% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
82.38% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Lake Wanaka i-SITE Visitor Information Centre face-to-face reviews is 82.38% and is based on 63 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
86.80%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S Weslake | 10/10 | 293 days | 86.4 | 100% | |
| Ixtaso Roncal | 8/10 | 1147 days | 4.93 | 1% | |
| Christop Grepper | 9/10 | 1376 days |  |
5.54 | 2% |
| Regula Hammer | 9/10 | 1376 days | |
5.54 | 2% |
| Charles Aubry | 10/10 | 1411 days | |
5.48 | 2% |
| Elisa Felising | 8/10 | 1413 days | |
5.48 | 2% |
| Barbara | 10/10 | 1462 days | |
5.4 | 2% |
| Hubert Schmid | 10/10 | 1533 days | |
5.28 | 2% |
| Ane Didriksen | 8/10 | 1720 days | |
4.97 | 2% |
| Iris Anette Berger | 7/10 | 1720 days | |
4.97 | 2% |
| Douglas Yeates | 7/10 | 1720 days | |
4.97 | 2% |
| Stefanie | 7/10 | 1722 days | |
4.97 | 2% |
| Martin Sajdok | 10/10 | 1725 days | |
4.96 | 2% |
| Claudia Hillebrand | 8/10 | 1727 days | |
4.96 | 1% |
| Mark | 8/10 | 1736 days | |
4.95 | 1% |
| Petra Albrchtoval | 6/10 | 1746 days | |
4.93 | 1% |
| Helene Andersen | 9/10 | 1749 days | |
4.92 | 1% |
| Claudia Bauch | 10/10 | 1752 days | |
4.92 | 1% |
| Daniel Robledo | 9/10 | 1755 days | |
4.92 | 1% |
| Maria Camen Santos Lopez | 10/10 | 1755 days | |
4.92 | 1% |
| Joris Giullemot | 10/10 | 1756 days | |
4.91 | 1% |
| Mara | 8/10 | 1756 days | |
4.91 | 1% |
| Olivier Carval | 7/10 | 1756 days | |
4.91 | 1% |
| Bex Hyland | 9/10 | 1763 days | |
4.9 | 1% |
| Mirjam Betschart | 8/10 | 1768 days | |
4.89 | 1% |
| Manuela Michelbach | 6/10 | 1771 days | |
4.89 | 1% |
| Lopez Anandine | 8/10 | 1771 days | |
4.89 | 1% |
| Sybille Willenbrock | 9/10 | 1776 days | |
4.88 | 1% |
| F Ballard | 9/10 | 1780 days | |
4.87 | 1% |
| Christina Habranke | 10/10 | 1794 days | |
4.85 | 1% |
| Wouter Bosch | 10/10 | 1795 days | |
4.85 | 1% |
| Derek Knight | 10/10 | 1796 days | |
4.85 | 1% |
| Julia Kallenbach | 10/10 | 1799 days | |
4.84 | 1% |
| Gilad Itzkovitz | 10/10 | 1802 days | |
4.84 | 1% |
| Doran Swartz | 8/10 | 1803 days | |
4.84 | 1% |
| Hindrek Lind | 5/10 | 1805 days | |
4.83 | 1% |
| Anne and Steve Bartlett | 9/10 | 1805 days | |
4.83 | 1% |
| Danyelle Miller | 8/10 | 1805 days | |
4.83 | 1% |
| Susser | 9/10 | 1806 days | |
4.83 | 1% |
| Elly Zimmer | 2/10 | 1820 days | |
4.33 | 1% |
| Paige Galbraith | 7/10 | 1821 days | |
4.81 | 1% |
| hendrik king | 10/10 | 2027 days | 3.72 | 0% | |
| Michael Heuer | 10/10 | 2096 days | |
4.35 | 1% |
| Supiot Zudovic | 10/10 | 2101 days | |
4.35 | 1% |
| Maria Klister | 5/10 | 2103 days | |
4.34 | 1% |
| Bettina Fluhrer | 8/10 | 2104 days | |
4.34 | 1% |
| Marie | 8/10 | 2104 days | |
4.34 | 1% |
| Tom Somers | 9/10 | 2105 days | |
4.34 | 1% |
| Galen Licht | 7/10 | 2107 days | |
4.34 | 1% |
| Lea Scheuvens | 9/10 | 2109 days | |
4.33 | 1% |
| Petra Blumberg | 10/10 | 2125 days | |
4.31 | 1% |
| Enna Keet | 8/10 | 2131 days | |
4.3 | 1% |
| Tim Sautter | 10/10 | 2132 days | |
4.3 | 1% |
| Peter Moederer | 10/10 | 2136 days | |
4.29 | 1% |
| Fabian and Teresa | 3/10 | 2140 days | |
3.96 | 0% |
| Margaret and Derek McNeil | 7/10 | 2194 days | |
4.19 | 1% |
| Martyn Kool | 9/10 | 2195 days | |
4.19 | 1% |
| Marieke | 7/10 | 2195 days | |
4.19 | 1% |
| Al Stuart | 10/10 | 2196 days | |
4.19 | 1% |
| Sharon Yates | 10/10 | 2197 days | |
4.19 | 1% |
| Jonathan Vondette | 9/10 | 2200 days | |
4.18 | 1% |
| Natalie Nubler | 4/10 | 2201 days | |
3.94 | 0% |
| Benedicte and Mathilde Colas | 8/10 | 2212 days | |
4.16 | 1% |
| Alex Laidlaw | 8/10 | 2216 days | |
4.16 | 1% |
| Ton Franke | 4/10 | 2225 days | |
3.9 | 0% |
| Marjo Cousijn | 9/10 | 2226 days | |
4.14 | 1% |
Adjustments
No Adjustment
Several adjustments to the weighted average may be added to improve relevancy and credibility. Lake Wanaka i-SITE Visitor Information Centre does not meet the criteria for any of these adjustments to apply.
Final Ranking Score
87%
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.