Cruise ratings can help you make a shortlist when you know who supplied the opinions, what was rated and when. Zagat’s 2009 cruise survey is a useful historical example: its overall scores, popularity choices and ship-size groups answered different questions. Apply the same reading habits to present-day awards before choosing a sailing.
What the 2009 survey measured
Zagat announced its first cruise-line survey on November 12, 2009. An archived contemporary repost of Zagat’s press release reports 2,379 respondents covering 22 lines. The announcement grouped lines by the average passenger capacity of ships in their fleets and rated cabins, service, dining, facilities and shipboard activities on a 30-point scale. The overall score averaged those five categories.
Cunard, Regent Seven Seas and SeaDream led the large-, mid-size- and small-ship groups respectively. The personal-favorite choices were different: Royal Caribbean, Crystal and Windstar. SeaDream’s own historical awards sheet (PDF) also lists the 2009 Zagat survey among its sources of recognition. These are historical results, not current rankings.
The distinction matters: a respondent’s favorite line and the highest average across scored categories can differ. The public announcement also leaves questions about recruitment, per-line response counts and score uncertainty. It provides insufficient information to treat a small score gap as a precise difference for every traveler.
Ask five questions about any rating
On a narrow screen, scroll this table sideways. Keyboard users can focus it and use the arrow keys.
| Question | Look for | How to use the answer |
|---|---|---|
| When? | Travel dates covered, review window and publication year | An award published this year may summarize earlier sailings. |
| Who? | Passenger reviews, invited voters, editors or inspectors | Use each as a particular kind of evidence, with its own selection process. |
| What? | A named ship, entire line, cabin category or specific experience | Match the rated object to the booking you are considering. |
| Compared with what? | Ship-size bands, market segments and eligibility thresholds | Winning a restricted category differs from leading all ships. |
| How calculated? | Average, weighted score, vote count or editorial judgment | Compare scores only when their definitions and scales align. |
For example, Cruise Critic’s 2025 awards explanation distinguishes editors’ choices from its Cruisers’ Choice results, which use passenger reviews from the preceding year and require a minimum review count. That method differs from a single inspection or a vote for a favorite brand.
Cruiseline.com’s 2025 ship awards say they used reviews from January through December 2024 and combined ships across sizes and types. Read that window before assuming the award describes a recent refurbishment or a change made in 2025. A newer publication date alone does not make every experience behind it recent.
Turn a broad award into a ship-specific check
Write down the exact ship, departure date, itinerary and cabin category you might book. Check its current operator page and sailing-date deck plan. A line-level award cannot establish that this ship has a particular restaurant, that your fare includes it or that the cabin beside a music venue will suit an early bedtime.
Read several recent accounts of the same ship and, where possible, a similar itinerary and cabin. Extract specifics: a long tender queue, limited evening dining times, an obstructed balcony or helpful embarkation arrangements. Separate recurring observations from one-off disruptions. Verify consequential claims with the operator, particularly access needs and booking conditions.
Use three essential requirements as a first filter. Only compare optional benefits after each candidate meets those requirements. A high entertainment rating cannot compensate for an inaccessible cabin or dates that do not fit your journey.
See how priorities change a result
Worked example: your weights, your decision
This invented comparison is a personal planning exercise, not a published cruise rating. Score two suitable sailings from 1 to 5. Give itinerary 50% of the weight, quiet cabin fit 30% and dining fit 20%. Sailing A scores 5, 3 and 4: 5 × 0.50 + 3 × 0.30 + 4 × 0.20 = 4.2. Sailing B scores 4, 5 and 4: 4 × 0.50 + 5 × 0.30 + 4 × 0.20 = 4.3.
B edges ahead for those preferences, but a 0.1 difference is too small to resolve uncertain inputs. If itinerary becomes 70%, quiet cabin 10% and dining 20%, A scores 4.6 and B 4.1. The changed outcome exposes the real question: how much does the itinerary matter to you?
Record the evidence behind each personal score and the questions still open. Compare full costs and cancellation terms separately. Use the editable cruise-rating worksheet to keep the published rating, your own preferences and operator confirmations distinct.
Finish with reasons you can explain
A useful shortlist says why each sailing fits: the ports you want, manageable arrival plans, a suitable cabin and a price you understand. Keep an award as supporting context. Your final choice should remain understandable even if a different line wins next year.
Related travel resources
- Compare cabins and costs on a specific ship
- Plan a Queen Mary 2 crossing
- Compare a complete family cruise fare
- Browse all travel guides
Researched and updated October 3, 2026. Check the linked official information for your dates, party and booking terms.