Hi, 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 Waitangi Holiday Park.
If you have any questions or comments about our ranking score calculation please get in touch at info@rankers.co.nz. We don't believe this is perfect or complete so we're always interested in ways we might make improvements.
Waitangi Holiday Park
Valid Reviews
92 Valid Reviews
The Waitangi Holiday Park experience has a total of 93 reviews. There are 92 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 92 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 19 |
|
21% |
| 9/10 | 27 |
|
29% |
| 8/10 | 26 |
|
28% |
| 7/10 | 10 |
|
11% |
| 6/10 | 3 |
|
3% |
| 5/10 | 3 |
|
3% |
| 4/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 3/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 2/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 1/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
81.96% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Waitangi Holiday Park valid reviews is 81.96% and is based on 92 valid reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here as a comparison to the weighted average.
Face-to-Face Reviews
15 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.
More about face-to-face reviews
Within the 92 valid reviews, the experience has 15 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 15 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 9/10 | 2 |
|
13% |
| 8/10 | 7 |
|
47% |
| 7/10 | 5 |
|
33% |
| 6/10 | 1 |
|
7% |
| 5/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
76.67% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Waitangi Holiday Park face-to-face reviews is 76.67% and is based on 15 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
85.30%
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.
| Reviewer | Rating | Age | Relative Weight |
|---|---|---|---|
| Matteo Francesco Balloni | 10/10 | 69 days | 100% |
| Harley Berggren | 10/10 | 192 days | 98% |
| John Wood | 8/10 | 253 days | 95% |
| Allison Miles | 10/10 | 253 days | 97% |
| ILEA TANT | 8/10 | 281 days | 94% |
| laurent bloch | 10/10 | 404 days | 91% |
| Carmen | 8/10 | 465 days | 86% |
| Rich | 8/10 | 496 days | 84% |
| Debbie | 8/10 | 618 days | 77% |
| Ale | 1/10 | 708 days | 29% |
| Diana | 9/10 | 769 days | 66% |
| Mark | 9/10 | 983 days | 45% |
| Henk | 5/10 | 1074 days | 28% |
| iona.catley@hotmail.co.uk | 9/10 | 1349 days | 18% |
| Jo | 4/10 | 1408 days | 10% |
| Stefanie | 6/10 | 1561 days | 8% |
| Paulo | 9/10 | 1592 days | 8% |
| Jax | 5/10 | 1622 days | 6% |
| Marg Dale | 8/10 | 1957 days | 5% |
| The wandering kiwi | 9/10 | 2048 days | 4% |
| Crystal | 8/10 | 2230 days | 4% |
| sara hollander | 9/10 | 2472 days | 4% |
| Sarah | 9/10 | 2472 days | 4% |
| Just a guy | 10/10 | 2473 days | 4% |
| Miles | 10/10 | 2504 days | 4% |
| eskimo | 10/10 | 2657 days | 3% |
| Maëlys | 10/10 | 2749 days | 3% |
| Kaarina | 2/10 | 2838 days | 1% |
| Lena | 8/10 | 2869 days | 3% |
| Rosamund Gilligan | 8/10 | 2929 days | 3% |
| Nielsa | 8/10 | 2930 days | 3% |
| Nigel Jarvis | 10/10 | 2961 days | 3% |
| Edward Lowe | 9/10 | 2961 days | 3% |
| shaun mcgillicuddy | 8/10 | 2991 days | 3% |
| Stefano Clerici | 9/10 | 3052 days | 2% |
| Helene | 6/10 | 3144 days | 2% |
| Andrew Rex | 9/10 | 3180 days | 2% |
| Eline Stoutjesdijk | 7/10 | 3309 days | 2% |
| Geoff Steele | 10/10 | 3355 days | 2% |
| Fifi and Jay | 8/10 | 3453 days | 2% |
| Anja Röhrich | 9/10 | 3487 days | 2% |
| Stephen Mcbride | 3/10 | 3518 days | 1% |
| Anne Loehner | 9/10 | 3543 days | 2% |
| Breanna Alexander | 8/10 | 3588 days | 1% |
| Matthew Hassam | 8/10 | 3598 days | 1% |
| Stacey Arnold | 9/10 | 3629 days | 1% |
| Victor Miro | 7/10 | 3659 days | 1% |
| Shelly Stanchuk | 10/10 | 3659 days | 1% |
| Cindy Lewis | 10/10 | 3690 days | 1% |
| Jeffrey Ross | 10/10 | 3718 days | 1% |
| Tim Holmes | 10/10 | 3762 days | 1% |
| David Mason | 10/10 | 3811 days | 1% |
| Chantelle Hiley | 9/10 | 3827 days | 1% |
| Lyn Pobke | 9/10 | 3841 days | 1% |
| Philip Cook | 9/10 | 3850 days | 1% |
| Goldfinger | 10/10 | 3873 days | 1% |
| Achim Stegmann | 10/10 | 3879 days | 1% |
| Graeme O'Keeffe | 9/10 | 3891 days | 1% |
| Ann-Catherine Deblon | 8/10 | 3901 days | 1% |
| Staffan Johansson | 8/10 | 3916 days | 1% |
| Antonio BENITEZ | 7/10 | 3964 days | 1% |
| Peter Marshall | 9/10 | 3982 days | 1% |
| Ana Luisa Santo | 9/10 | 4075 days | 0% |
| Rebecca Can | 9/10 | 4147 days | 0% |
| J V Henare | 9/10 | 4176 days | 0% |
| andrew simpson | 9/10 | 4237 days | 0% |
| Oliver Pester | 10/10 | 4270 days | 0% |
| Florian Kleemann | 8/10 | 4282 days | 0% |
| Laurie | 9/10 | 4329 days | 0% |
| Jim Sidroy | 9/10 | 4331 days | 0% |
| Thomas Marte | 10/10 | 4390 days | 1% |
| Heather Kingston | 8/10 | 4390 days | 1% |
| Shelley Storey | 9/10 | 4695 days | 1% |
| Jade Fleming | 8/10 | 4756 days | 1% |
| Lindsay Berquist | 7/10 | 4940 days | 1% |
| Hanneke P | 7/10 | 5060 days | 1% |
| Alexander Klein | 8/10 | 5095 days | 1% |
| Reinhard Stahl | 7/10 | 5096 days | 1% |
| Reinhard Stahl | 7/10 | 5096 days | 1% |
| Jenben | 9/10 | 5152 days | 1% |
| Liz Stokes | 9/10 | 5382 days | 1% |
| Andy Lever | 6/10 | 5472 days | 0% |
| David | 7/10 | 5750 days | 1% |
| GrantW | 5/10 | 5822 days | 1% |
| Mike Robinson | 8/10 | 6090 days | 1% |
| Helmet Paula | 8/10 | 6110 days | 1% |
| Robert Scharrenborg | 8/10 | 6124 days | 1% |
| Vanessa | 8/10 | 6198 days | 1% |
| richardh | 7/10 | 6312 days | 1% |
| Martien van Brakel | 7/10 | 6431 days | 1% |
| BrendaM | 8/10 | 6448 days | 1% |
| CarolF | 8/10 | 6466 days | 1% |
Adjustments
Several adjustments to the weighted average are added to improve relevancy and credibility. These adjustments apply equally to all experiences that meet the criteria.
Sample Size Adjustment
No Adjustment
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 Waitangi Holiday Park experience has plenty of reviews and does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
Recent Reviews Adjustment
-0.59% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 47 days. However the Waitangi Holiday Park 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 Waitangi Holiday Park experience has been adjusted for 30 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 27 | -0.53% |
| 28 | -0.55% |
| 29 | -0.57% |
| 30 | -0.59% |
| 31 | -0.61% |
| 32 | -0.63% |
| 33 | -0.65% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
1.88% Adjustment
Every experience's review score is adjusted to balance out the disproportional number of negative reviews that are contributed.
You won't be surprised to learn that disgruntled customers are more likely to leave a review than happy ones. They are motivated to share their experience and warn others. We consider this a good thing and it's why reading the reviews is important. However we've learned it can misrepresent the experience in a more overall sense.
We apply a balancing adjustment to counteract this effect and ensure the ranking score is a more fair representation of the experience. This adjustment is applied equally to all experiences.
Final Ranking Score
87%
The final ranking score once any adjustments, ratings, and rounding has been applied. This value is recalculated each day and a short rolling average is applied. Therefore it may not be precisely accurate based on the other values presented.