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
88.89%
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 | 200 days | 100% |
| Rich | 9/10 | 444 days | 92% |
| Jason C | 10/10 | 506 days | 89% |
| Donna | 10/10 | 506 days | 89% |
| Aoife | 8/10 | 688 days | 75% |
| Laura | 9/10 | 1268 days | 23% |
| Ferg | 10/10 | 1268 days | 23% |
| Inge | 8/10 | 1327 days | 19% |
| Cindi Wight | 9/10 | 1388 days | 16% |
| Sarah | 8/10 | 1419 days | 14% |
| Alexis | 10/10 | 2270 days | 4% |
| Cody | 10/10 | 2363 days | 4% |
| Mike Smith | 7/10 | 2423 days | 3% |
| Beth Carlton | 1/10 | 2484 days | 1% |
| Christian | 10/10 | 2757 days | 3% |
| Emma | 9/10 | 2788 days | 3% |
| Demi Thompson | 6/10 | 2849 days | 2% |
| Brett See | 9/10 | 2880 days | 3% |
| Mike Fricker | 9/10 | 2880 days | 3% |
| Urs Bruderer | 10/10 | 3568 days | 1% |
| Leslie Lindeman | 10/10 | 3779 days | 1% |
| Ray Tombs | 9/10 | 3782 days | 1% |
| Phillippa McLernon | 8/10 | 3841 days | 1% |
| Tine Fook | 6/10 | 3877 days | 0% |
| Jan Towers | 8/10 | 4522 days | 1% |
| Brita Topp | 8/10 | 4524 days | 1% |
| Mike Fricker | 8/10 | 4524 days | 1% |
| Mark Towers | 8/10 | 4555 days | 1% |
| Rikke Petersen | 9/10 | 4573 days | 1% |
| Ted Cole | 8/10 | 4583 days | 1% |
| Nigel | 8/10 | 4590 days | 1% |
| catherine welsh | 8/10 | 4614 days | 1% |
| Nigel & Annie Dale | 8/10 | 4675 days | 1% |
| ozelmer | 6/10 | 4735 days | 0% |
| AusCampa | 9/10 | 4858 days | 1% |
| Mark Wiggington | 7/10 | 4883 days | 0% |
| Ken Milligan | 8/10 | 4907 days | 1% |
| Gale Willcocks | 10/10 | 4913 days | 1% |
| Ken Richardson | 8/10 | 4913 days | 1% |
| Heather Macdonald | 9/10 | 4948 days | 1% |
| Nadine | 9/10 | 4992 days | 1% |
| Robert Staeller | 8/10 | 4995 days | 1% |
| David and Sally Wallis | 9/10 | 5001 days | 1% |
| Jackie and Brian | 8/10 | 5002 days | 1% |
| Peter | 10/10 | 5003 days | 1% |
| Julia Ramseier | 10/10 | 5022 days | 1% |
| Lisa Blake | 8/10 | 5026 days | 1% |
| Ton Franke | 8/10 | 5026 days | 1% |
| Megan Child | 9/10 | 5027 days | 1% |
| Jonathan Tuthill | 10/10 | 5270 days | 1% |
| Carly Braddock | 10/10 | 5274 days | 1% |
| Def Fem | 8/10 | 5280 days | 1% |
| launch | 7/10 | 5285 days | 0% |
| Michael Jefferies | 9/10 | 5288 days | 1% |
| Mark Bogton | 9/10 | 5294 days | 1% |
| Dominik Langenegger | 10/10 | 5296 days | 1% |
| Moehl | 9/10 | 5297 days | 1% |
| D Collier | 10/10 | 5298 days | 1% |
| Uwe Henze | 8/10 | 5299 days | 1% |
| Ute Rogawski | 7/10 | 5306 days | 0% |
| Nikita Sue | 7/10 | 5307 days | 0% |
| Heewin Otten | 10/10 | 5307 days | 1% |
| D R Valentine | 10/10 | 5308 days | 1% |
| Andreas Kristiansen | 9/10 | 5308 days | 1% |
| Petra | 10/10 | 5309 days | 1% |
| John Reynolds | 10/10 | 5309 days | 1% |
| Katie K | 10/10 | 5323 days | 1% |
| ZephyrTL | 8/10 | 5345 days | 1% |
| Peter, Noelle & Susanne | 10/10 | 5379 days | 1% |
| John & Myra Sloan | 9/10 | 5385 days | 1% |
| Jan & Marian | 10/10 | 5388 days | 1% |
| Andy Lever | 9/10 | 5391 days | 1% |
| Peter Spooner | 8/10 | 5393 days | 1% |
| damaca | 9/10 | 5466 days | 1% |
| Tacksharp | 9/10 | 5528 days | 1% |
| Edward Marhi | 9/10 | 5616 days | 1% |
| Weez18 | 10/10 | 5620 days | 1% |
| de Smedt | 9/10 | 5623 days | 1% |
| Eric Grant | 8/10 | 5625 days | 1% |
| Koen Vanlede | 8/10 | 5637 days | 1% |
| Sue Top | 10/10 | 5638 days | 1% |
| Marty Fey | 5/10 | 5642 days | 0% |
| Gord Carnochan | 9/10 | 5652 days | 1% |
| Pam & Rob Tellwright | 8/10 | 5655 days | 1% |
| Derek Puplett | 9/10 | 5655 days | 1% |
| Callum Sibbald | 8/10 | 5655 days | 1% |
| Gerlach | 8/10 | 5656 days | 1% |
| Agnes McMillan | 10/10 | 5663 days | 1% |
| Jill Dean | 8/10 | 5666 days | 1% |
| Philipp Rau | 8/10 | 5670 days | 1% |
| Eva Stauderova | 10/10 | 5670 days | 1% |
| Annette Mogg | 10/10 | 5675 days | 1% |
| Andrew Hammond | 8/10 | 5802 days | 1% |
| Betty le Brech | 8/10 | 5998 days | 1% |
| Ed & Pat Mitchell | 9/10 | 6024 days | 1% |
| Sue Bennett | 7/10 | 6026 days | 0% |
| Dieter Groscurth | 8/10 | 6026 days | 1% |
| Liz Pursey | 9/10 | 6036 days | 1% |
| pvo plas | 8/10 | 6038 days | 1% |
| Hoogh | 9/10 | 6041 days | 1% |
| Carina Raeder | 8/10 | 6042 days | 1% |
| John Rylance | 10/10 | 6043 days | 1% |
| Lamb | 9/10 | 6043 days | 1% |
| Tonny | 9/10 | 6043 days | 1% |
| Tim | 7/10 | 6044 days | 0% |
| Allan Bond | 7/10 | 6050 days | 0% |
| uleugel | 9/10 | 6053 days | 1% |
| Jeannot Robert | 10/10 | 6054 days | 1% |
| Norbert Hainz | 8/10 | 6057 days | 1% |
| Heino keyssler | 10/10 | 6064 days | 1% |
| T S | 10/10 | 6075 days | 1% |
| eliertv | 9/10 | 6090 days | 1% |
| adamek | 7/10 | 6090 days | 0% |
| frederike | 8/10 | 6091 days | 1% |
| Karin Linder | 9/10 | 6110 days | 1% |
| Bue Verrept | 8/10 | 6113 days | 1% |
| Pia | 2/10 | 6117 days | 0% |
| Gebert | 8/10 | 6117 days | 1% |
| Daniel Alonso | 8/10 | 6118 days | 1% |
| Ana Garcia | 9/10 | 6119 days | 1% |
| Kelly | 10/10 | 6260 days | 1% |
| Johnnie | 8/10 | 6330 days | 1% |
| AndySwitzerland | 8/10 | 6333 days | 1% |
| suet | 7/10 | 6350 days | 0% |
| scottl | 7/10 | 6350 days | 0% |
| neeltjec | 9/10 | 6350 days | 1% |
| Martien van Brakel | 9/10 | 6350 days | 1% |
| BevanLisa | 8/10 | 6367 days | 1% |
| JeremyE | 8/10 | 6368 days | 1% |
| TessaW | 4/10 | 6368 days | 0% |
| LucyT | 10/10 | 6368 days | 1% |
| Florens | 8/10 | 6370 days | 1% |
| Joel | 7/10 | 6370 days | 0% |
| Tiemen | 7/10 | 6370 days | 0% |
| NikkiB1 | 9/10 | 6385 days | 1% |
| BrunoS | 9/10 | 6385 days | 1% |
| JoseB | 9/10 | 6392 days | 1% |
| Debbie | 9/10 | 6392 days | 1% |
| InkenGermany | 9/10 | 6392 days | 1% |
| John | 7/10 | 6399 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
-2.17% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 110 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 184 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 181 | -2.14% |
| 182 | -2.15% |
| 183 | -2.16% |
| 184 | -2.17% |
| 185 | -2.19% |
| 186 | -2.20% |
| 187 | -2.21% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
1.50% 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.