Ranking Score Explained
Hi there, 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 Ohiwa Beach 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.
Ohiwa Beach Holiday Park
Valid Reviews
87 Valid Reviews
The Ohiwa Beach Holiday Park experience has a total of 89 reviews. There are 87 valid reviews that are included when calculating the ranking score and 2 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 87 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 65 |
|
75% |
| 9/10 | 14 |
|
16% |
| 8/10 | 4 |
|
5% |
| 7/10 | 3 |
|
3% |
| 6/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 5/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
95.52% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Ohiwa Beach Holiday Park valid reviews is 95.52% and is based on 87 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
6 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 87 valid reviews, the experience has 6 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 6 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 3 |
|
50% |
| 9/10 | 1 |
|
17% |
| 8/10 | 2 |
|
33% |
| 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% |
91.67% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Ohiwa Beach Holiday Park face-to-face reviews is 91.67% and is based on 6 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
97.41%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| ML | 10/10 | 53 days | 100% |
| Stu | 10/10 | 206 days | 94% |
| Christine Martin | 10/10 | 206 days | 94% |
| T McLeod | 10/10 | 206 days | 94% |
| Tracey Kereopa | 10/10 | 206 days | 94% |
| Jan Mclaren | 10/10 | 206 days | 94% |
| Desa | 10/10 | 237 days | 91% |
| Dons | 10/10 | 237 days | 91% |
| Evelyn Pine | 10/10 | 237 days | 91% |
| Joan Pritchard | 9/10 | 237 days | 91% |
| Otilia and Johan | 9/10 | 265 days | 89% |
| blair stephens | 10/10 | 265 days | 89% |
| kay henderson | 10/10 | 265 days | 89% |
| Pete Harrison | 10/10 | 265 days | 89% |
| Kathleen Chan | 9/10 | 265 days | 89% |
| Allen | 10/10 | 265 days | 89% |
| Bethan | 7/10 | 296 days | 79% |
| MK | 10/10 | 296 days | 86% |
| Sharon | 10/10 | 296 days | 86% |
| Sue Shoemack | 10/10 | 296 days | 86% |
| Elrika Keyser | 10/10 | 296 days | 86% |
| Aaron Menzies | 10/10 | 327 days | 83% |
| Ian Buck | 10/10 | 327 days | 83% |
| Sarah Jane Ramaker | 10/10 | 357 days | 80% |
| Tess Nesdale | 10/10 | 388 days | 76% |
| Janet Henderson | 10/10 | 388 days | 76% |
| Sue | 10/10 | 388 days | 76% |
| NATALIE ERASMUS | 9/10 | 480 days | 64% |
| John Jury | 10/10 | 480 days | 64% |
| Brian Derbyshire | 10/10 | 510 days | 59% |
| James & Derryn | 10/10 | 541 days | 54% |
| Karen and Eric | 10/10 | 602 days | 44% |
| Meryl D | 8/10 | 602 days | 41% |
| Merle Bray, Elizabeth Watson & Bella | 9/10 | 631 days | 39% |
| Ian Campbell | 10/10 | 662 days | 35% |
| Jabba | 9/10 | 662 days | 35% |
| Johannes | 10/10 | 693 days | 31% |
| Dieter Giesen | 10/10 | 693 days | 31% |
| Neal Rastrick | 10/10 | 723 days | 27% |
| Mike Taylor | 10/10 | 723 days | 27% |
| Truds/ Shaun McGregor | 10/10 | 815 days | 17% |
| Rachael | 10/10 | 846 days | 15% |
| Tarina McKenzie | 10/10 | 846 days | 15% |
| Dianne Wade | 10/10 | 876 days | 12% |
| Cliff & Tracey | 10/10 | 876 days | 12% |
| Beth | 10/10 | 937 days | 9% |
| Liz | 10/10 | 937 days | 9% |
| Paul Smith | 8/10 | 996 days | 6% |
| Alan & Lesley Ball | 9/10 | 996 days | 6% |
| John Zoetebier | 2/10 | 1027 days | 4% |
| phil smith | 9/10 | 1027 days | 6% |
| Anne & John | 10/10 | 1180 days | 5% |
| Chris&Kevin Rush | 10/10 | 1272 days | 4% |
| Paul and Nat Wright | 10/10 | 1302 days | 4% |
| Dan Kilkelly | 10/10 | 1302 days | 4% |
| John Curries | 10/10 | 1333 days | 4% |
| Trish & Ian | 10/10 | 1333 days | 4% |
| Jenny Sullivan | 10/10 | 1333 days | 4% |
| Tina and Terry | 9/10 | 1361 days | 4% |
| Katie Wiffin | 10/10 | 1392 days | 4% |
| kay henderson | 10/10 | 1392 days | 4% |
| Phil and Dianne Neal | 9/10 | 1393 days | 4% |
| Leith Milson | 10/10 | 1453 days | 4% |
| John Peddie | 10/10 | 2032 days | 3% |
| York Tüchelmann | 10/10 | 2057 days | 3% |
| Liz Peters | 10/10 | 2063 days | 3% |
| Shelley Martin | 10/10 | 2092 days | 3% |
| Debbie Thomas | 10/10 | 2123 days | 3% |
| Hana Rachfalik | 10/10 | 2142 days | 3% |
| Sheriden Derby | 10/10 | 2398 days | 2% |
| Trevor Brown | 9/10 | 2480 days | 2% |
| BernardB | 10/10 | 2488 days | 2% |
| Jason | 9/10 | 2488 days | 2% |
| Ray | 10/10 | 2686 days | 1% |
| C&P Macwhippy | 9/10 | 2763 days | 2% |
| Daisy Shasta | 10/10 | 2801 days | 1% |
| Rita Hochstiasser | 9/10 | 2819 days | 1% |
| Jacqui V | 7/10 | 2822 days | 1% |
| Brendan K | 10/10 | 2822 days | 1% |
| E and C Tipuna | 10/10 | 2853 days | 1% |
| Jenny Hall | 7/10 | 2884 days | 1% |
| Tracie Thornborough | 10/10 | 2884 days | 1% |
| justin butler | 10/10 | 2884 days | 1% |
| Mick McIvor | 10/10 | 2975 days | 1% |
| E Smudde | 8/10 | 3537 days | 0% |
| Eric & Liz McKean | 10/10 | 3872 days | 0% |
| Pieter Middeldorp | 8/10 | 4251 days | 0% |
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 Ohiwa Beach Holiday Park experience has plenty of reviews and does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
Recent Reviews Adjustment
-0.35% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 54 days. However the Ohiwa Beach 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 Ohiwa Beach Holiday Park experience has been adjusted for 19 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 16 | -0.30% |
| 17 | -0.32% |
| 18 | -0.34% |
| 19 | -0.35% |
| 20 | -0.37% |
| 21 | -0.39% |
| 22 | -0.41% |
| … | … |
Final Ranking Score
97%
The final ranking score once adjustments and rounding has been applied. This value is cached and recalculated each day. Therefore it may not be precisely accurate based on the other values presented.
If you have any questions or comments about our ranking score calculation please get in touch at info@rankers.co.nz.