Kia ora, 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 Picton Tasman Holiday Parks.
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.
Picton Tasman Holiday Parks
Valid Reviews
140 Valid Reviews
The Picton Tasman Holiday Parks experience has a total of 141 reviews. There are 140 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 140 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 33 |
|
24% |
| 9/10 | 41 |
|
29% |
| 8/10 | 45 |
|
32% |
| 7/10 | 14 |
|
10% |
| 6/10 | 3 |
|
2% |
| 5/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 4/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 1/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
84.79% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Picton Tasman Holiday Parks valid reviews is 84.79% and is based on 140 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
101 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 140 valid reviews, the experience has 101 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 101 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 23 |
|
23% |
| 9/10 | 30 |
|
30% |
| 8/10 | 33 |
|
33% |
| 7/10 | 12 |
|
12% |
| 6/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 5/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 4/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
85.05% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Picton Tasman Holiday Parks face-to-face reviews is 85.05% and is based on 101 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
88.92%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Andrew Lester | 8/10 | 139 days | 100% |
| Rich | 9/10 | 384 days | 94% |
| Jason C | 10/10 | 445 days | 91% |
| Donna | 10/10 | 445 days | 91% |
| Aoife | 8/10 | 627 days | 78% |
| Laura | 9/10 | 1207 days | 27% |
| Ferg | 10/10 | 1207 days | 27% |
| Inge | 8/10 | 1266 days | 23% |
| Cindi Wight | 9/10 | 1327 days | 19% |
| Sarah | 8/10 | 1358 days | 17% |
| Alexis | 10/10 | 2210 days | 4% |
| Cody | 10/10 | 2302 days | 4% |
| Mike Smith | 7/10 | 2362 days | 3% |
| Beth Carlton | 1/10 | 2423 days | 1% |
| Christian | 10/10 | 2696 days | 3% |
| Emma | 9/10 | 2727 days | 3% |
| Demi Thompson | 6/10 | 2788 days | 2% |
| Brett See | 9/10 | 2819 days | 3% |
| Mike Fricker | 9/10 | 2819 days | 3% |
| Urs Bruderer | 10/10 | 3507 days | 1% |
| Leslie Lindeman | 10/10 | 3719 days | 1% |
| Ray Tombs | 9/10 | 3722 days | 1% |
| Phillippa McLernon | 8/10 | 3780 days | 1% |
| Tine Fook | 6/10 | 3816 days | 1% |
| Jan Towers | 8/10 | 4461 days | 1% |
| Brita Topp | 8/10 | 4463 days | 1% |
| Mike Fricker | 8/10 | 4463 days | 1% |
| Mark Towers | 8/10 | 4494 days | 1% |
| Rikke Petersen | 9/10 | 4512 days | 1% |
| Ted Cole | 8/10 | 4522 days | 1% |
| Nigel | 8/10 | 4529 days | 1% |
| catherine welsh | 8/10 | 4553 days | 1% |
| Nigel & Annie Dale | 8/10 | 4614 days | 1% |
| ozelmer | 6/10 | 4675 days | 0% |
| AusCampa | 9/10 | 4798 days | 1% |
| Mark Wiggington | 7/10 | 4822 days | 0% |
| Ken Milligan | 8/10 | 4846 days | 1% |
| Gale Willcocks | 10/10 | 4852 days | 1% |
| Ken Richardson | 8/10 | 4852 days | 1% |
| Heather Macdonald | 9/10 | 4887 days | 1% |
| Nadine | 9/10 | 4931 days | 1% |
| Robert Staeller | 8/10 | 4934 days | 1% |
| David and Sally Wallis | 9/10 | 4940 days | 1% |
| Jackie and Brian | 8/10 | 4941 days | 1% |
| Peter | 10/10 | 4942 days | 1% |
| Julia Ramseier | 10/10 | 4961 days | 1% |
| Lisa Blake | 8/10 | 4965 days | 1% |
| Ton Franke | 8/10 | 4965 days | 1% |
| Megan Child | 9/10 | 4966 days | 1% |
| Jonathan Tuthill | 10/10 | 5209 days | 1% |
| Carly Braddock | 10/10 | 5213 days | 1% |
| Def Fem | 8/10 | 5219 days | 1% |
| launch | 7/10 | 5224 days | 0% |
| Michael Jefferies | 9/10 | 5227 days | 1% |
| Mark Bogton | 9/10 | 5233 days | 1% |
| Dominik Langenegger | 10/10 | 5235 days | 1% |
| Moehl | 9/10 | 5236 days | 1% |
| D Collier | 10/10 | 5237 days | 1% |
| Uwe Henze | 8/10 | 5238 days | 1% |
| Ute Rogawski | 7/10 | 5245 days | 0% |
| Nikita Sue | 7/10 | 5246 days | 0% |
| Heewin Otten | 10/10 | 5246 days | 1% |
| D R Valentine | 10/10 | 5247 days | 1% |
| Andreas Kristiansen | 9/10 | 5247 days | 1% |
| Petra | 10/10 | 5248 days | 1% |
| John Reynolds | 10/10 | 5248 days | 1% |
| Katie K | 10/10 | 5262 days | 1% |
| ZephyrTL | 8/10 | 5284 days | 1% |
| Peter, Noelle & Susanne | 10/10 | 5318 days | 1% |
| John & Myra Sloan | 9/10 | 5324 days | 1% |
| Jan & Marian | 10/10 | 5327 days | 1% |
| Andy Lever | 9/10 | 5330 days | 1% |
| Peter Spooner | 8/10 | 5332 days | 1% |
| damaca | 9/10 | 5406 days | 1% |
| Tacksharp | 9/10 | 5468 days | 1% |
| Edward Marhi | 9/10 | 5556 days | 1% |
| Weez18 | 10/10 | 5559 days | 1% |
| de Smedt | 9/10 | 5562 days | 1% |
| Eric Grant | 8/10 | 5564 days | 1% |
| Koen Vanlede | 8/10 | 5576 days | 1% |
| Sue Top | 10/10 | 5577 days | 1% |
| Marty Fey | 5/10 | 5581 days | 0% |
| Gord Carnochan | 9/10 | 5591 days | 1% |
| Pam & Rob Tellwright | 8/10 | 5594 days | 1% |
| Derek Puplett | 9/10 | 5594 days | 1% |
| Callum Sibbald | 8/10 | 5594 days | 1% |
| Gerlach | 8/10 | 5595 days | 1% |
| Agnes McMillan | 10/10 | 5602 days | 1% |
| Jill Dean | 8/10 | 5605 days | 1% |
| Philipp Rau | 8/10 | 5609 days | 1% |
| Eva Stauderova | 10/10 | 5609 days | 1% |
| Annette Mogg | 10/10 | 5614 days | 1% |
| Andrew Hammond | 8/10 | 5741 days | 1% |
| Betty le Brech | 8/10 | 5937 days | 1% |
| Ed & Pat Mitchell | 9/10 | 5963 days | 1% |
| Sue Bennett | 7/10 | 5965 days | 0% |
| Dieter Groscurth | 8/10 | 5965 days | 1% |
| Liz Pursey | 9/10 | 5975 days | 1% |
| pvo plas | 8/10 | 5977 days | 1% |
| Hoogh | 9/10 | 5980 days | 1% |
| Carina Raeder | 8/10 | 5981 days | 1% |
| John Rylance | 10/10 | 5982 days | 1% |
| Lamb | 9/10 | 5982 days | 1% |
| Tonny | 9/10 | 5982 days | 1% |
| Tim | 7/10 | 5983 days | 0% |
| Allan Bond | 7/10 | 5989 days | 0% |
| uleugel | 9/10 | 5992 days | 1% |
| Jeannot Robert | 10/10 | 5993 days | 1% |
| Norbert Hainz | 8/10 | 5996 days | 1% |
| Heino keyssler | 10/10 | 6003 days | 1% |
| T S | 10/10 | 6014 days | 1% |
| eliertv | 9/10 | 6029 days | 1% |
| adamek | 7/10 | 6029 days | 0% |
| frederike | 8/10 | 6030 days | 1% |
| Karin Linder | 9/10 | 6049 days | 1% |
| Bue Verrept | 8/10 | 6052 days | 1% |
| Pia | 2/10 | 6056 days | 0% |
| Gebert | 8/10 | 6056 days | 1% |
| Daniel Alonso | 8/10 | 6057 days | 1% |
| Ana Garcia | 9/10 | 6058 days | 1% |
| Kelly | 10/10 | 6200 days | 1% |
| Johnnie | 8/10 | 6270 days | 1% |
| AndySwitzerland | 8/10 | 6273 days | 1% |
| suet | 7/10 | 6289 days | 0% |
| scottl | 7/10 | 6289 days | 0% |
| neeltjec | 9/10 | 6289 days | 1% |
| Martien van Brakel | 9/10 | 6289 days | 1% |
| BevanLisa | 8/10 | 6306 days | 1% |
| JeremyE | 8/10 | 6307 days | 1% |
| TessaW | 4/10 | 6307 days | 0% |
| LucyT | 10/10 | 6307 days | 1% |
| Florens | 8/10 | 6309 days | 1% |
| Joel | 7/10 | 6309 days | 0% |
| Tiemen | 7/10 | 6309 days | 0% |
| NikkiB1 | 9/10 | 6324 days | 1% |
| BrunoS | 9/10 | 6324 days | 1% |
| JoseB | 9/10 | 6331 days | 1% |
| Debbie | 9/10 | 6331 days | 1% |
| InkenGermany | 9/10 | 6331 days | 1% |
| John | 7/10 | 6338 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 Picton Tasman Holiday Parks experience has plenty of reviews and does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
Recent Reviews Adjustment
-1.32% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 118 days. However the Picton Tasman Holiday Parks 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 Picton Tasman Holiday Parks experience has been adjusted for 123 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 120 | -1.29% |
| 121 | -1.30% |
| 122 | -1.31% |
| 123 | -1.32% |
| 124 | -1.33% |
| 125 | -1.34% |
| 126 | -1.36% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
1.36% 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
89%
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.