Methodology

How the numbers on a venue page are computed, and just as importantly, what they don't claim.

Bayesian shrinkage, in plain words

A venue's displayed rating is not its raw average. It is adjusted using a standard statistical method called Bayesian shrinkage: the raw average is pulled toward the average for its comparison cohort (venues in the same category and market), in proportion to how few reviews back it up. A restaurant with 800 reviews sits close to its own raw average. A cafe with 12 reviews is pulled much closer to the cohort average, because 12 data points aren't enough to trust on their own.

Cohorts and denominators

Every comparison line names the cohort a venue is measured against and discloses how many venues or reviews that cohort contains (the denominator). A confidence read without that context isn't published here.

What every number carries with it

A rating or count on this site always carries the review count it's based on and the date it was last computed. A number shown without that context would be misleading, so it isn't shown that way.

What we don't claim

• No trend or momentum figure is shown unless at least two dated snapshots exist to compute one honestly. Until then, that field simply doesn't render, it isn't estimated.
• No public review source is listed as active for a venue until that source's data is actually flowing into this site. A source planned for later is never shown as already live.
• No sentiment, ranking, or comparison figure is invented to fill a gap. Missing data stays missing.

Update cadence

Each page updates when the underlying public data is re-collected. There isn't a fixed public schedule for that yet at this stage; it will be published here once it stabilizes.