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 Rankers Booking Service.
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.
84 Valid Reviews
The Rankers Booking Service experience has a total of 85 reviews. There are 84 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 84 valid reviews:
The raw data average (mean) for all the Rankers Booking Service valid reviews is 95.36% and is based on 84 valid reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here as a comparison to the weighted average.
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.
|BACHAND Alain||9/10||635 days||100%|
|anja Grigori-Roth||10/10||635 days||100%|
|Jranette Billings||9/10||635 days||100%|
|Steven Miller||10/10||665 days||87%|
|René van der Molen||10/10||666 days||87%|
|John Ehrlich||10/10||666 days||87%|
|Erica Chisholm||10/10||666 days||87%|
|Paola La Rocca||9/10||666 days||87%|
|Mike Bromfield||10/10||697 days||75%|
|paul white||9/10||697 days||75%|
|Alois Markart||10/10||697 days||75%|
|VERNET ALEXANDRA||10/10||697 days||75%|
|Amandine Darnet||10/10||697 days||75%|
|herve duflot||10/10||697 days||75%|
|DESIDERIO MOLERO||9/10||727 days||64%|
|Piotr Lubowicki||10/10||727 days||64%|
|Christopher Anker||10/10||727 days||64%|
|Michael Rovinsky||10/10||727 days||64%|
|Kirsty Gillett||10/10||757 days||54%|
|Paul Stevens||10/10||758 days||54%|
|Sabrina Maier||10/10||758 days||54%|
|M FAIZAL JABAR||10/10||758 days||54%|
|Bree Lawlor||10/10||758 days||54%|
|Nusyana Cham Pi||10/10||758 days||54%|
|Benjamin Bakk||10/10||758 days||54%|
|Robert Dugyik||10/10||758 days||54%|
|Loïc Clerc||10/10||758 days||54%|
|Joe Culbertson||9/10||758 days||54%|
|Alechia Crown||10/10||758 days||54%|
|Irene Lanser||8/10||788 days||42%|
|Susan S||8/10||788 days||42%|
|Sarah Peres||10/10||788 days||45%|
|Brian Webber||10/10||788 days||45%|
|Henry Schenker||10/10||788 days||45%|
|bat a||9/10||788 days||45%|
|Judy Holt||8/10||788 days||42%|
|Taher Hasanali||10/10||788 days||45%|
|Susan Boyton||10/10||819 days||37%|
|jeffrey goebel||9/10||819 days||37%|
|Charlotte Amouret||10/10||819 days||37%|
|Sophie ROUX||10/10||850 days||29%|
|Heather McDonald||9/10||850 days||29%|
|Debra Tolic||10/10||850 days||29%|
|Chee Kuan Lim||9/10||850 days||29%|
|G Visser||10/10||850 days||29%|
|DEBBIE LAMBERT||10/10||850 days||29%|
|Gina DAVIS||10/10||850 days||29%|
|Paul Mullooly||10/10||850 days||29%|
|Lucie PHILIPPE||10/10||850 days||29%|
|Emily Joyce||9/10||880 days||23%|
|Sergio Meana Martinez||10/10||880 days||23%|
|Evelyn Toh||10/10||880 days||23%|
|Jean-Luc Brocard||9/10||880 days||23%|
|Deborah Vitali||8/10||911 days||15%|
|Jeramy Janoski||10/10||911 days||17%|
|Daniel Benjamin||10/10||911 days||17%|
|Sarah Bailey||10/10||911 days||17%|
|Michael Jost||10/10||911 days||17%|
|Van Weigel||10/10||911 days||17%|
|Lizzie Lacey-Brennan||10/10||911 days||17%|
|Chia Shen Cheng||10/10||940 days||12%|
|Gilbert Deveaux||10/10||940 days||12%|
|Kathryn Conrad||10/10||941 days||12%|
|Fannie Bernier||9/10||941 days||12%|
|hannah murray||8/10||941 days||11%|
|Whitney Bak||10/10||941 days||12%|
|Sandra Cabrera||9/10||941 days||12%|
|Wendy Leung||10/10||941 days||12%|
|Adrian Trumper||9/10||941 days||12%|
|Marcos Tosto||7/10||941 days||10%|
|John van Herk||9/10||941 days||12%|
|Teun Steur||9/10||941 days||12%|
|JOSY ANANTA WIJAYA||10/10||972 days||8%|
|Citra Lestari||10/10||972 days||8%|
|wendy legge||10/10||972 days||8%|
|ALEX RIVERO||9/10||972 days||8%|
|David Caravati||10/10||972 days||8%|
|F B||8/10||1000 days||4%|
|MERVYN ADAMS||6/10||1030 days||0%|
|Chan Hoe Yip||8/10||1061 days||1%|
|Ana Segota||10/10||1091 days||1%|
|Mark Lechner||10/10||1091 days||1%|
|Richard Tallack||10/10||1122 days||1%|
Several adjustments to the weighted average are added to improve relevancy and credibility. These adjustments apply equally to all experiences that meet the criteria.
A reasonable number of reviews are necessary in order for the average to be credible and for an experience to take a prime position within the ranking tables. As such, experiences with only a few reviews have a moderated score. This does not mean that the experience or the reviews can't be trusted. The Rankers Booking Service experience has plenty of reviews and does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 52 days. However the Rankers Booking Service experience does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
In addition, an experience's ranking score may be adjusted for each day there is no new ranking. After 1 day the adjustment comes into effect. The maximum number of days that can be adjusted for is 200 days. Due to the seasonal nature of many businesses, this adjustment is applied dynamically throughout the year.
The Rankers Booking Service experience has been adjusted for 200 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
The final ranking score once adjustments and 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.