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 Hanmer Field Base and Picnic Area.
If you have any questions or comments about our ranking score calculation please get in touch at email@example.com. We don't believe this is perfect or complete so we're always interested in ways we might make improvements.
55 Valid Reviews
The Hanmer Field Base and Picnic Area experience has a total of 61 reviews. There are 55 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 55 valid reviews:
The raw data average (mean) for all the Hanmer Field Base and Picnic Area valid reviews is 80.36% and is based on 55 valid reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here as a comparison to the weighted average.
5 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 55 valid reviews, the experience has 5 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 5 face-to-face reviews:
The raw data average (mean) for all the Hanmer Field Base and Picnic Area face-to-face reviews is 78.00% and is based on 5 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.
|Stefan Hohmann||8/10||127 days||92.57||94%|
|Ymke Huisman||6/10||554 days||42.64||42%|
|Sophie Skinner||9/10||584 days||46.38||46%|
|Mike Fricker||9/10||615 days||41.51||41%|
|Jenna webber||8/10||645 days||35.23||35%|
|Brittany Jackson||8/10||676 days||31.18||30%|
|Michelle D||9/10||768 days||21.94||21%|
|Carl Fogarty||9/10||798 days||18.98||18%|
|Simon Springett||8/10||843 days||14.31||13%|
|Luis Vigil Vidal||9/10||871 days||12.95||12%|
|Patrick Currier||8/10||885 days||11.39||10%|
|Rogier Kavelaars||8/10||935 days||8.6||7%|
|Vander Plancke Julien||8/10||941 days||8.32||7%|
|Jasmine Andrew||9/10||964 days||7.72||6%|
|Katherine Ong||10/10||970 days||7.48||6%|
|Jo Dawson||7/10||1092 days||4.55||3%|
|Beverley Halfhide||5/10||1136 days||3.99||2%|
|Ann Le||9/10||1145 days||4.9||3%|
|Les Tregier||10/10||1160 days||4.87||3%|
|Craig Wilcock||8/10||1168 days||4.61||3%|
|Tim Statler||9/10||1213 days||4.77||3%|
|Walter Neff||1/10||1221 days||3.47||2%|
|Catherine Johnston||8/10||1386 days||4.21||3%|
|Matt Hughes||9/10||1527 days||4.15||2%|
|Sam Smith-Palomeque||9/10||1545 days||4.12||2%|
|Sean Stevens||8/10||1560 days||3.89||2%|
|Zdenda Barvinek||9/10||1611 days||3.99||2%|
|Dieter Schmees||6/10||1996 days||2.69||1%|
|Moudry Vojtech||8/10||2030 days||3.01||1%|
|Sina Leidig||1/10||2044 days||2.29||1%|
|Kathy Hart||9/10||2229 days||2.78||1%|
|Nadia R||8/10||2259 days||2.59||1%|
|John Treasure||7/10||2318 days||2.37||1%|
|Bev Stott||7/10||2661 days||1.76||0%|
|Daniel Jezak||9/10||2665 days||1.93||0%|
Several adjustments to the weighted average may be added to improve relevancy and credibility. Hanmer Field Base and Picnic Area 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 firstname.lastname@example.org.