Flip it upside down. Make the top of the graph the goal (zero error) and hang the bars underneath. This way you can still have the general idea of higher is better, and you can then chart going from bottom to top, following the standard visual layout for 'progress'.
Here's a random example from the internet:
While this chart is about a single continuous statistic rather than several unrelated ones (performance of one algorithm doesn't depend on another algorithm) the visual layout still works.
Alternatively, if there is a maximum error, or if you can set an outer bound for it (for example, what is the error rate of a completely randomized outcome vs the algos) you can make the bars X minus the current value. For example if randomized is 50.000, nearest neighbour would be 27.000 better, and xgboost would be 37.750 better. This would mean that larger is indeed better, and you can use the current layout.
Consider mirroring left and right. Using the most important value first makes sense (especially if latter datapoints might be truncated!), sure, but it's in conflict with the 'improvement' metaphor of going to the topright. Having the worst first and the best last makes for a better 'story'.
I would also emphasize the good/bad with colors. Right now the colors don't have a clear meaning. Swapping either the orange or the dark purple for a medium/light blue should work fairly well.