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 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
139 Valid Reviews
The Picton Tasman Holiday Parks experience has a total of 140 reviews. There are 139 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 139 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 33 |
|
24% |
| 9/10 | 41 |
|
29% |
| 8/10 | 44 |
|
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% |
84.82% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Picton Tasman Holiday Parks valid reviews is 84.82% and is based on 139 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 139 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
90.29%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rich | 9/10 | 238 days | 100% |
| Jason C | 10/10 | 299 days | 99% |
| Donna | 10/10 | 299 days | 99% |
| Aoife | 8/10 | 481 days | 89% |
| Laura | 9/10 | 1061 days | 40% |
| Ferg | 10/10 | 1061 days | 40% |
| Inge | 8/10 | 1120 days | 34% |
| Cindi Wight | 9/10 | 1181 days | 30% |
| Sarah | 8/10 | 1212 days | 27% |
| Alexis | 10/10 | 2064 days | 5% |
| Cody | 10/10 | 2156 days | 5% |
| Mike Smith | 7/10 | 2216 days | 4% |
| Beth Carlton | 1/10 | 2277 days | 2% |
| Christian | 10/10 | 2550 days | 4% |
| Emma | 9/10 | 2581 days | 4% |
| Demi Thompson | 6/10 | 2642 days | 3% |
| Brett See | 9/10 | 2673 days | 3% |
| Mike Fricker | 9/10 | 2673 days | 3% |
| Urs Bruderer | 10/10 | 3361 days | 2% |
| Leslie Lindeman | 10/10 | 3573 days | 2% |
| Ray Tombs | 9/10 | 3576 days | 2% |
| Phillippa McLernon | 8/10 | 3634 days | 1% |
| Tine Fook | 6/10 | 3670 days | 1% |
| Jan Towers | 8/10 | 4315 days | 0% |
| Brita Topp | 8/10 | 4317 days | 0% |
| Mike Fricker | 8/10 | 4317 days | 0% |
| Mark Towers | 8/10 | 4348 days | 0% |
| Rikke Petersen | 9/10 | 4366 days | 0% |
| Ted Cole | 8/10 | 4376 days | 0% |
| Nigel | 8/10 | 4383 days | 1% |
| catherine welsh | 8/10 | 4407 days | 1% |
| Nigel & Annie Dale | 8/10 | 4468 days | 1% |
| ozelmer | 6/10 | 4529 days | 1% |
| AusCampa | 9/10 | 4652 days | 1% |
| Mark Wiggington | 7/10 | 4676 days | 1% |
| Ken Milligan | 8/10 | 4700 days | 1% |
| Gale Willcocks | 10/10 | 4706 days | 1% |
| Ken Richardson | 8/10 | 4706 days | 1% |
| Heather Macdonald | 9/10 | 4741 days | 1% |
| Nadine | 9/10 | 4785 days | 1% |
| Robert Staeller | 8/10 | 4788 days | 1% |
| David and Sally Wallis | 9/10 | 4794 days | 1% |
| Jackie and Brian | 8/10 | 4795 days | 1% |
| Peter | 10/10 | 4796 days | 1% |
| Julia Ramseier | 10/10 | 4815 days | 1% |
| Lisa Blake | 8/10 | 4819 days | 1% |
| Ton Franke | 8/10 | 4819 days | 1% |
| Megan Child | 9/10 | 4820 days | 1% |
| Jonathan Tuthill | 10/10 | 5063 days | 1% |
| Carly Braddock | 10/10 | 5067 days | 1% |
| Def Fem | 8/10 | 5073 days | 1% |
| launch | 7/10 | 5078 days | 1% |
| Michael Jefferies | 9/10 | 5081 days | 1% |
| Mark Bogton | 9/10 | 5087 days | 1% |
| Dominik Langenegger | 10/10 | 5089 days | 1% |
| Moehl | 9/10 | 5090 days | 1% |
| D Collier | 10/10 | 5091 days | 1% |
| Uwe Henze | 8/10 | 5092 days | 1% |
| Ute Rogawski | 7/10 | 5099 days | 1% |
| Nikita Sue | 7/10 | 5100 days | 1% |
| Heewin Otten | 10/10 | 5100 days | 1% |
| D R Valentine | 10/10 | 5101 days | 1% |
| Andreas Kristiansen | 9/10 | 5101 days | 1% |
| Petra | 10/10 | 5102 days | 1% |
| John Reynolds | 10/10 | 5102 days | 1% |
| Katie K | 10/10 | 5116 days | 1% |
| ZephyrTL | 8/10 | 5138 days | 1% |
| Peter, Noelle & Susanne | 10/10 | 5172 days | 1% |
| John & Myra Sloan | 9/10 | 5178 days | 1% |
| Jan & Marian | 10/10 | 5181 days | 1% |
| Andy Lever | 9/10 | 5184 days | 1% |
| Peter Spooner | 8/10 | 5186 days | 1% |
| damaca | 9/10 | 5260 days | 1% |
| Tacksharp | 9/10 | 5322 days | 1% |
| Edward Marhi | 9/10 | 5410 days | 1% |
| Weez18 | 10/10 | 5413 days | 1% |
| de Smedt | 9/10 | 5416 days | 1% |
| Eric Grant | 8/10 | 5418 days | 1% |
| Koen Vanlede | 8/10 | 5430 days | 1% |
| Sue Top | 10/10 | 5431 days | 1% |
| Marty Fey | 5/10 | 5435 days | 1% |
| Gord Carnochan | 9/10 | 5445 days | 1% |
| Pam & Rob Tellwright | 8/10 | 5448 days | 1% |
| Derek Puplett | 9/10 | 5448 days | 1% |
| Callum Sibbald | 8/10 | 5448 days | 1% |
| Gerlach | 8/10 | 5449 days | 1% |
| Agnes McMillan | 10/10 | 5456 days | 1% |
| Jill Dean | 8/10 | 5459 days | 1% |
| Philipp Rau | 8/10 | 5463 days | 1% |
| Eva Stauderova | 10/10 | 5463 days | 1% |
| Annette Mogg | 10/10 | 5468 days | 1% |
| Andrew Hammond | 8/10 | 5595 days | 1% |
| Betty le Brech | 8/10 | 5791 days | 1% |
| Ed & Pat Mitchell | 9/10 | 5817 days | 1% |
| Sue Bennett | 7/10 | 5819 days | 1% |
| Dieter Groscurth | 8/10 | 5819 days | 1% |
| Liz Pursey | 9/10 | 5829 days | 1% |
| pvo plas | 8/10 | 5831 days | 1% |
| Hoogh | 9/10 | 5834 days | 1% |
| Carina Raeder | 8/10 | 5835 days | 1% |
| John Rylance | 10/10 | 5836 days | 1% |
| Lamb | 9/10 | 5836 days | 1% |
| Tonny | 9/10 | 5836 days | 1% |
| Tim | 7/10 | 5837 days | 1% |
| Allan Bond | 7/10 | 5843 days | 1% |
| uleugel | 9/10 | 5846 days | 1% |
| Jeannot Robert | 10/10 | 5847 days | 1% |
| Norbert Hainz | 8/10 | 5850 days | 1% |
| Heino keyssler | 10/10 | 5857 days | 1% |
| T S | 10/10 | 5868 days | 1% |
| eliertv | 9/10 | 5883 days | 1% |
| adamek | 7/10 | 5883 days | 1% |
| frederike | 8/10 | 5884 days | 1% |
| Karin Linder | 9/10 | 5903 days | 1% |
| Bue Verrept | 8/10 | 5906 days | 1% |
| Pia | 2/10 | 5910 days | 0% |
| Gebert | 8/10 | 5910 days | 1% |
| Daniel Alonso | 8/10 | 5911 days | 1% |
| Ana Garcia | 9/10 | 5912 days | 1% |
| Kelly | 10/10 | 6054 days | 1% |
| Johnnie | 8/10 | 6124 days | 1% |
| AndySwitzerland | 8/10 | 6127 days | 1% |
| suet | 7/10 | 6143 days | 1% |
| scottl | 7/10 | 6143 days | 1% |
| neeltjec | 9/10 | 6143 days | 1% |
| Martien van Brakel | 9/10 | 6143 days | 1% |
| BevanLisa | 8/10 | 6160 days | 1% |
| JeremyE | 8/10 | 6161 days | 1% |
| TessaW | 4/10 | 6161 days | 1% |
| LucyT | 10/10 | 6161 days | 1% |
| Florens | 8/10 | 6163 days | 1% |
| Joel | 7/10 | 6163 days | 1% |
| Tiemen | 7/10 | 6163 days | 1% |
| NikkiB1 | 9/10 | 6178 days | 1% |
| BrunoS | 9/10 | 6178 days | 1% |
| JoseB | 9/10 | 6185 days | 1% |
| Debbie | 9/10 | 6185 days | 1% |
| InkenGermany | 9/10 | 6185 days | 1% |
| John | 7/10 | 6192 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 Picton Tasman Holiday Parks experience has plenty of reviews and does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
Recent Reviews Adjustment
-4.12% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 48 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 200 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 197 | -4.06% |
| 198 | -4.08% |
| 199 | -4.10% |
| 200 | -4.12% |
| 201 | -4.14% |
| 202 | -4.16% |
| 203 | -4.18% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
1.60% 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
88%
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.