Hey, 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 Ahipara Top 10 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.
101 Valid Reviews
The Ahipara Top 10 Holiday Park experience has a total of 105 reviews. There are 101 valid reviews that are included when calculating the ranking score and 4 invalid reviews 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 101 valid reviews:
Rating | Count | Percentage | |
---|---|---|---|
10/10 | 50 |
|
50% |
9/10 | 30 |
|
30% |
8/10 | 13 |
|
13% |
7/10 | 5 |
|
5% |
6/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
5/10 | 2 |
|
2% |
4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
91.58% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Ahipara Top 10 Holiday Park valid reviews is 91.58% and is based on 101 valid reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here as a comparison to the weighted average.
13 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 101 valid reviews, the experience has 13 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 13 face-to-face reviews:
Rating | Count | Percentage | |
---|---|---|---|
10/10 | 2 |
|
15% |
9/10 | 7 |
|
54% |
8/10 | 4 |
|
31% |
7/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
6/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
5/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
88.46% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Ahipara Top 10 Holiday Park face-to-face reviews is 88.46% and is based on 13 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
94.16%
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 |
---|---|---|---|
Debbie | 9/10 | 80 days | 99% |
Marilyn Miller | 10/10 | 108 days | 100% |
Stefan Lee | 9/10 | 292 days | 95% |
Stu | 10/10 | 323 days | 95% |
Morgane | 9/10 | 353 days | 93% |
Roger Clark | 9/10 | 474 days | 87% |
Kurt | 10/10 | 780 days | 66% |
Roger Heckly | 10/10 | 811 days | 63% |
Anne Hiske | 10/10 | 839 days | 60% |
Kellie | 9/10 | 992 days | 44% |
Dan | 10/10 | 1084 days | 36% |
Jo Pullar | 10/10 | 1176 days | 29% |
Amy | 9/10 | 1235 days | 25% |
Tyler | 7/10 | 1266 days | 21% |
Peri | 10/10 | 1510 days | 10% |
Tayler | 8/10 | 1541 days | 9% |
Richard ChCh NZ | 7/10 | 1569 days | 8% |
Paul Thomas | 10/10 | 1600 days | 8% |
Edy @#$ | 10/10 | 1692 days | 6% |
Sara | 9/10 | 1722 days | 5% |
Kris | 10/10 | 1722 days | 5% |
Swiny101 | 10/10 | 1722 days | 5% |
Robo | 9/10 | 1753 days | 5% |
Evans Family | 10/10 | 1784 days | 5% |
Michael Northam | 10/10 | 1935 days | 5% |
Wendy | 10/10 | 1935 days | 5% |
Dave Kitson | 9/10 | 1935 days | 4% |
Maria | 10/10 | 1966 days | 4% |
N&A | 5/10 | 1997 days | 3% |
Dean | 10/10 | 2058 days | 4% |
Traveller | 10/10 | 2300 days | 4% |
Jen Doherty | 9/10 | 2300 days | 4% |
Paul Smith | 10/10 | 2331 days | 4% |
Sabine | 10/10 | 2331 days | 4% |
Lizzie | 10/10 | 2392 days | 4% |
Harrie | 10/10 | 2392 days | 4% |
Stefan Beiner | 10/10 | 2392 days | 4% |
Daphne H | 10/10 | 2453 days | 3% |
Kimberly | 10/10 | 2453 days | 3% |
Teaghan | 10/10 | 2545 days | 3% |
Phil Masters | 10/10 | 2605 days | 3% |
Michael Stützle | 10/10 | 2606 days | 3% |
Birte | 9/10 | 2637 days | 3% |
Annette | 10/10 | 2637 days | 3% |
Cindy Blignaut | 10/10 | 2675 days | 3% |
Leanne Taylor-Smith | 8/10 | 2715 days | 3% |
Nora Tobies | 10/10 | 2732 days | 3% |
Sandra Wilson-Ryke | 10/10 | 2767 days | 3% |
Eline Stoutjesdijk | 8/10 | 2771 days | 3% |
Leonie Scholten | 10/10 | 2837 days | 3% |
Viola Cube | 9/10 | 2865 days | 3% |
Jonathan Smith | 10/10 | 2989 days | 2% |
Wayne Britton | 10/10 | 2994 days | 2% |
Bert Tory | 10/10 | 3014 days | 2% |
Paul Smith | 10/10 | 3032 days | 2% |
Paul Schleifenbaum | 10/10 | 3038 days | 2% |
Catherine Kay | 9/10 | 3045 days | 2% |
Geoffrey McCall | 10/10 | 3090 days | 2% |
Robert Hunt | 8/10 | 3102 days | 2% |
Rima | 9/10 | 3122 days | 2% |
Kelsey Nolan | 8/10 | 3134 days | 2% |
Miraz Tastula | 10/10 | 3162 days | 2% |
Graeme Herbert | 9/10 | 3168 days | 2% |
Michelle Smit | 9/10 | 3213 days | 2% |
Stephanie Oliver | 10/10 | 3231 days | 2% |
Julian Minnis | 10/10 | 3314 days | 2% |
Goldfinger | 9/10 | 3335 days | 2% |
Clare Backman | 8/10 | 3337 days | 2% |
Elaine Carter | 9/10 | 3342 days | 2% |
Volker Stroenisch | 10/10 | 3343 days | 2% |
Ulrich Rix | 9/10 | 3366 days | 2% |
Bill Milburn | 9/10 | 3399 days | 2% |
Darma Bone | 9/10 | 3408 days | 2% |
Ashley Shand | 10/10 | 3409 days | 2% |
Chris Brasell | 7/10 | 3424 days | 1% |
Ron Ozarka | 9/10 | 3457 days | 1% |
Fabien Metro | 8/10 | 3561 days | 1% |
Benjamin Buehlmann | 5/10 | 3677 days | 1% |
Heather Kingston | 7/10 | 3852 days | 1% |
chris young | 6/10 | 3945 days | 0% |
Sarah Beyeler | 10/10 | 4097 days | 0% |
Kim Lavener | 10/10 | 4097 days | 0% |
Family Trip | 10/10 | 4098 days | 0% |
catherine welsh | 9/10 | 4157 days | 0% |
Sabine | 8/10 | 4218 days | 0% |
Chris | 10/10 | 4402 days | 1% |
KDS_Holiday | 7/10 | 4614 days | 1% |
Adrian Weidell | 9/10 | 4758 days | 0% |
Markus Heummer | 9/10 | 4841 days | 0% |
Fleur & Nils | 9/10 | 4850 days | 0% |
Sashia | 9/10 | 4909 days | 0% |
Chris & Susanna | 8/10 | 4920 days | 0% |
Eri & Udo Seifert | 9/10 | 4928 days | 0% |
Erik Folkersen | 8/10 | 4933 days | 0% |
Julie Norton | 8/10 | 5164 days | 0% |
Kari Tervo | 9/10 | 5186 days | 0% |
GrantW | 10/10 | 5284 days | 1% |
Andrew Hammond | 8/10 | 5345 days | 1% |
Taya Cross | 10/10 | 5587 days | 1% |
parker1 | 9/10 | 5633 days | 0% |
Robert | 8/10 | 5940 days | 0% |
Several adjustments to the weighted average are added to improve relevancy and credibility. These adjustments apply equally to all experiences that meet the criteria.
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 Ahipara Top 10 Holiday Park experience has plenty of reviews and does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
-0.53% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 96 days. However the Ahipara Top 10 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 Ahipara Top 10 Holiday Park experience has been adjusted for 39 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
Days | Adjustment |
---|---|
… | … |
36 | -0.48% |
37 | -0.50% |
38 | -0.51% |
39 | -0.53% |
40 | -0.54% |
41 | -0.55% |
42 | -0.57% |
… | … |
0.57% 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.
94%
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.