Hi, 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 Fiordland National Park.
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.
Fiordland National Park
Valid Reviews
50 Valid Reviews
The Fiordland National Park experience has a total of 51 reviews. There are 50 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 50 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 17 |
|
34% |
| 9/10 | 19 |
|
38% |
| 8/10 | 9 |
|
18% |
| 7/10 | 5 |
|
10% |
| 6/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 5/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
89.60% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Fiordland National Park valid reviews is 89.60% and is based on 50 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
50 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 50 valid reviews, the experience has 50 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 50 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 17 |
|
34% |
| 9/10 | 19 |
|
38% |
| 8/10 | 9 |
|
18% |
| 7/10 | 5 |
|
10% |
| 6/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 5/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
89.60% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Fiordland National Park face-to-face reviews is 89.60% and is based on 50 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
88.34%
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 | Relative Weight |
|---|---|---|---|
| Danica Vrsaljko | 7/10 | 3953 days | 78% |
| Markus Johannes | 7/10 | 3953 days | 78% |
| Coralie Ambrosino | 8/10 | 3954 days | 82% |
| Rebecca Wharton | 8/10 | 3982 days | 76% |
| Bart Hanssen | 7/10 | 4035 days | 63% |
| Kilian Vos | 9/10 | 4042 days | 65% |
| Bartlomiej Berger | 10/10 | 4062 days | 62% |
| Antoine Vernay | 9/10 | 4062 days | 62% |
| Anja Weppler | 10/10 | 4299 days | 16% |
| Jacques Revel | 9/10 | 4302 days | 15% |
| Karen Garvin | 10/10 | 4302 days | 15% |
| jefft | 9/10 | 4302 days | 15% |
| Simeon W | 8/10 | 4314 days | 12% |
| Henrik Bours | 9/10 | 4316 days | 12% |
| Svenja Trubenbach | 10/10 | 4316 days | 12% |
| thibaut vernelle | 8/10 | 4330 days | 9% |
| Julia Seiffert | 10/10 | 4333 days | 9% |
| Daniel Robledo | 9/10 | 4333 days | 9% |
| Austin Johns | 9/10 | 4334 days | 9% |
| Joris Giullemot | 10/10 | 4334 days | 9% |
| Olivier Carval | 9/10 | 4334 days | 9% |
| Sagi | 8/10 | 4336 days | 8% |
| Maria = Moller Hansen | 10/10 | 4343 days | 7% |
| David Forman | 9/10 | 4347 days | 6% |
| Tobias Gehring | 10/10 | 4351 days | 5% |
| Simon Tanguy | 8/10 | 4351 days | 5% |
| Xavier | 9/10 | 4353 days | 5% |
| Matusala Habtemariam | 10/10 | 4356 days | 5% |
| M K | 9/10 | 4373 days | 1% |
| Ludvig Fagerstrom | 10/10 | 4379 days | 0% |
| Sara Williams | 10/10 | 4387 days | 100% |
| Thomas Roche | 9/10 | 4393 days | 99% |
| Evyatar Karni | 9/10 | 4394 days | 99% |
| Pierre Cinquin | 8/10 | 4624 days | 98% |
| Christin Woelk | 10/10 | 4661 days | 100% |
| Sven Woelk | 10/10 | 4661 days | 100% |
| Tim Vennewold | 9/10 | 4684 days | 99% |
| Yves Vennewald | 10/10 | 4684 days | 100% |
| Jiri van Straelper | 9/10 | 4684 days | 99% |
| Sabisch Moritz | 8/10 | 4697 days | 98% |
| Rob Cadmus | 9/10 | 4700 days | 99% |
| Kate Glover | 10/10 | 4700 days | 100% |
| Raquel | 8/10 | 4704 days | 98% |
| Fernando Martin | 7/10 | 4704 days | 93% |
| Francis Runge | 9/10 | 4711 days | 99% |
| Katharina Pape | 9/10 | 4785 days | 99% |
| Jon Barratt | 9/10 | 4793 days | 99% |
| Meryem Buchwitz | 10/10 | 4800 days | 100% |
| Rena and Kirsten | 7/10 | 4801 days | 93% |
| Abee and Suess | 10/10 | 4804 days | 100% |
Adjustments
No Adjustment
Several adjustments to the weighted average may be added to improve relevancy and credibility. Fiordland National Park does not meet the criteria for any of these adjustments to apply.
Balancing Adjustment
1.24% Adjustment
Every experience's review score is adjusted to balance out the disproportional number of negative reviews that are contributed.
You won't be surprised to learn that disgruntled folk are more likely to leave a review than happy ones. They are motivated to share their experience and warn others. We consider this a good thing and it's why reading the reviews is important. However we've learned it can misrepresent the experience in a more overall sense.
We apply a balancing adjustment to counteract this effect and ensure the ranking score is a more fair representation of the experience. This adjustment is applied equally to all experiences.
Final Ranking Score
90%
The final ranking score once any adjustments, ratings, and rounding has been applied. This value is recalculated each day and a short rolling average is applied. Therefore it may not be precisely accurate based on the other values presented.