Ranking Score Explained

Kia ora, 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 Huka/Aratiatia Rapids Scenic Reserve.

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.

Cymen Crick's avatar

Cymen Crick

Rankers Owner

Huka/Aratiatia Rapids Scenic Reserve

Valid Reviews

69 Valid Reviews

The Huka/Aratiatia Rapids Scenic Reserve experience has a total of 70 reviews. There are 69 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 69 valid reviews:

Rating Count Percentage
10/10 18
26%
9/10 15
22%
8/10 20
29%
7/10 13
19%
6/10 1
1%
5/10 1
1%
4/10 1
1%
3/10 0
0%
2/10 0
0%
1/10 0
0%

84.20% Average

The raw data average (mean) for all the Huka/Aratiatia Rapids Scenic Reserve valid reviews is 84.20% and is based on 69 valid reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here as a comparison to the weighted average.

Weighted Average

84.84%

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
Kirsty 10/10 44 days 100%
Maguelonne 4/10 75 days 65%
Elodie 10/10 197 days 98%
RGill 8/10 228 days 95%
Miriam 10/10 258 days 96%
Felicia 7/10 258 days 90%
Marine 8/10 289 days 93%
Graeme mac 10/10 348 days 93%
Mladen Savov 10/10 348 days 93%
K M 9/10 379 days 91%
Mathieu 10/10 440 days 89%
Milly Struthers 8/10 470 days 86%
Aaron 7/10 470 days 81%
Walvins 10/10 470 days 87%
A King 8/10 532 days 82%
AJC 5/10 532 days 64%
Holly 7/10 593 days 74%
Valg 8/10 623 days 76%
Holly 9/10 654 days 75%
Linda 8/10 683 days 72%
Dale Robinson 8/10 745 days 67%
Agnes 9/10 745 days 68%
Gunnar&Maria 8/10 745 days 67%
Pickles 8/10 775 days 64%
Mayla 8/10 775 days 64%
Marie Perret 9/10 806 days 62%
Maartje 7/10 836 days 56%
Fluid 10/10 836 days 60%
Henry 9/10 867 days 56%
J Ryder 10/10 898 days 54%
KiwiSauce 7/10 898 days 50%
Jolanda Krikke 8/10 898 days 53%
Paul 10/10 959 days 47%
Julie 9/10 959 days 47%
Christa 9/10 959 days 47%
Paul 9/10 959 days 47%
Shel 6/10 989 days 38%
wvdbos 7/10 989 days 41%
HJR 10/10 989 days 45%
Matthew 9/10 1048 days 39%
Isa 9/10 1048 days 39%
Haze 7/10 1048 days 36%
Willow 9/10 1079 days 36%
Paige Hayward 8/10 1140 days 31%
BerryD 9/10 1201 days 26%
Leet 8/10 1263 days 22%
Curtis 10/10 1324 days 19%
Juni 9/10 1444 days 13%
Keybags 10/10 1750 days 5%
Tessie 9/10 1778 days 4%
Rey 7/10 1840 days 4%
Natalie 10/10 1993 days 4%
Carl Bright 10/10 1993 days 4%
Dave 8/10 2023 days 4%
Lauren 10/10 2054 days 4%
Peter 9/10 2175 days 4%
Dennis Rijbroek 7/10 2297 days 3%
Adam 7/10 2297 days 3%
Mark Jarvis 7/10 2297 days 3%
Clare & Gerry 10/10 2481 days 3%
Pat Burns 7/10 2481 days 3%
Marion & Leonie 8/10 2509 days 3%
Anni 8/10 2540 days 3%
jofa972 8/10 2815 days 2%
Judy Aspinall 7/10 3165 days 2%
Beth Goodrich 8/10 3435 days 1%
Michal 10/10 3794 days 0%
Berni Hart 8/10 3941 days 0%
Cherie Marshall 8/10 4006 days 0%

Adjustments

No Adjustment

Several adjustments to the weighted average may be added to improve relevancy and credibility. Huka/Aratiatia Rapids Scenic Reserve does not meet the criteria for any of these adjustments to apply.

Balancing Adjustment

1.85% 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

87%

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.