G'day, 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
90.25%
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 | 187 days | 100% |
| Jason C | 10/10 | 248 days | 99% |
| Donna | 10/10 | 248 days | 99% |
| Aoife | 8/10 | 430 days | 90% |
| Laura | 9/10 | 1010 days | 44% |
| Ferg | 10/10 | 1010 days | 44% |
| Inge | 8/10 | 1069 days | 38% |
| Cindi Wight | 9/10 | 1130 days | 33% |
| Sarah | 8/10 | 1161 days | 30% |
| Alexis | 10/10 | 2013 days | 5% |
| Cody | 10/10 | 2105 days | 5% |
| Mike Smith | 7/10 | 2165 days | 4% |
| Beth Carlton | 1/10 | 2226 days | 2% |
| Christian | 10/10 | 2499 days | 4% |
| Emma | 9/10 | 2530 days | 4% |
| Demi Thompson | 6/10 | 2591 days | 3% |
| Brett See | 9/10 | 2622 days | 3% |
| Mike Fricker | 9/10 | 2622 days | 3% |
| Urs Bruderer | 10/10 | 3310 days | 2% |
| Leslie Lindeman | 10/10 | 3522 days | 2% |
| Ray Tombs | 9/10 | 3525 days | 2% |
| Phillippa McLernon | 8/10 | 3583 days | 2% |
| Tine Fook | 6/10 | 3619 days | 1% |
| Jan Towers | 8/10 | 4264 days | 0% |
| Brita Topp | 8/10 | 4266 days | 0% |
| Mike Fricker | 8/10 | 4266 days | 0% |
| Mark Towers | 8/10 | 4297 days | 0% |
| Rikke Petersen | 9/10 | 4315 days | 0% |
| Ted Cole | 8/10 | 4325 days | 0% |
| Nigel | 8/10 | 4332 days | 0% |
| catherine welsh | 8/10 | 4356 days | 0% |
| Nigel & Annie Dale | 8/10 | 4417 days | 1% |
| ozelmer | 6/10 | 4478 days | 1% |
| AusCampa | 9/10 | 4601 days | 1% |
| Mark Wiggington | 7/10 | 4625 days | 1% |
| Ken Milligan | 8/10 | 4649 days | 1% |
| Gale Willcocks | 10/10 | 4655 days | 1% |
| Ken Richardson | 8/10 | 4655 days | 1% |
| Heather Macdonald | 9/10 | 4690 days | 1% |
| Nadine | 9/10 | 4734 days | 1% |
| Robert Staeller | 8/10 | 4737 days | 1% |
| David and Sally Wallis | 9/10 | 4743 days | 1% |
| Jackie and Brian | 8/10 | 4744 days | 1% |
| Peter | 10/10 | 4745 days | 1% |
| Julia Ramseier | 10/10 | 4764 days | 1% |
| Lisa Blake | 8/10 | 4768 days | 1% |
| Ton Franke | 8/10 | 4768 days | 1% |
| Megan Child | 9/10 | 4769 days | 1% |
| Jonathan Tuthill | 10/10 | 5012 days | 1% |
| Carly Braddock | 10/10 | 5016 days | 1% |
| Def Fem | 8/10 | 5022 days | 1% |
| launch | 7/10 | 5027 days | 1% |
| Michael Jefferies | 9/10 | 5030 days | 1% |
| Mark Bogton | 9/10 | 5036 days | 1% |
| Dominik Langenegger | 10/10 | 5038 days | 1% |
| Moehl | 9/10 | 5039 days | 1% |
| D Collier | 10/10 | 5040 days | 1% |
| Uwe Henze | 8/10 | 5041 days | 1% |
| Ute Rogawski | 7/10 | 5048 days | 1% |
| Nikita Sue | 7/10 | 5049 days | 1% |
| Heewin Otten | 10/10 | 5049 days | 1% |
| D R Valentine | 10/10 | 5050 days | 1% |
| Andreas Kristiansen | 9/10 | 5050 days | 1% |
| Petra | 10/10 | 5051 days | 1% |
| John Reynolds | 10/10 | 5051 days | 1% |
| Katie K | 10/10 | 5065 days | 1% |
| ZephyrTL | 8/10 | 5087 days | 1% |
| Peter, Noelle & Susanne | 10/10 | 5121 days | 1% |
| John & Myra Sloan | 9/10 | 5127 days | 1% |
| Jan & Marian | 10/10 | 5130 days | 1% |
| Andy Lever | 9/10 | 5133 days | 1% |
| Peter Spooner | 8/10 | 5135 days | 1% |
| damaca | 9/10 | 5209 days | 1% |
| Tacksharp | 9/10 | 5271 days | 1% |
| Edward Marhi | 9/10 | 5359 days | 1% |
| Weez18 | 10/10 | 5362 days | 1% |
| de Smedt | 9/10 | 5365 days | 1% |
| Eric Grant | 8/10 | 5367 days | 1% |
| Koen Vanlede | 8/10 | 5379 days | 1% |
| Sue Top | 10/10 | 5380 days | 1% |
| Marty Fey | 5/10 | 5384 days | 1% |
| Gord Carnochan | 9/10 | 5394 days | 1% |
| Pam & Rob Tellwright | 8/10 | 5397 days | 1% |
| Derek Puplett | 9/10 | 5397 days | 1% |
| Callum Sibbald | 8/10 | 5397 days | 1% |
| Gerlach | 8/10 | 5398 days | 1% |
| Agnes McMillan | 10/10 | 5405 days | 1% |
| Jill Dean | 8/10 | 5408 days | 1% |
| Philipp Rau | 8/10 | 5412 days | 1% |
| Eva Stauderova | 10/10 | 5412 days | 1% |
| Annette Mogg | 10/10 | 5417 days | 1% |
| Andrew Hammond | 8/10 | 5544 days | 1% |
| Betty le Brech | 8/10 | 5740 days | 1% |
| Ed & Pat Mitchell | 9/10 | 5766 days | 1% |
| Sue Bennett | 7/10 | 5768 days | 1% |
| Dieter Groscurth | 8/10 | 5768 days | 1% |
| Liz Pursey | 9/10 | 5778 days | 1% |
| pvo plas | 8/10 | 5780 days | 1% |
| Hoogh | 9/10 | 5783 days | 1% |
| Carina Raeder | 8/10 | 5784 days | 1% |
| John Rylance | 10/10 | 5785 days | 1% |
| Lamb | 9/10 | 5785 days | 1% |
| Tonny | 9/10 | 5785 days | 1% |
| Tim | 7/10 | 5786 days | 1% |
| Allan Bond | 7/10 | 5792 days | 1% |
| uleugel | 9/10 | 5795 days | 1% |
| Jeannot Robert | 10/10 | 5796 days | 1% |
| Norbert Hainz | 8/10 | 5799 days | 1% |
| Heino keyssler | 10/10 | 5806 days | 1% |
| T S | 10/10 | 5817 days | 1% |
| eliertv | 9/10 | 5832 days | 1% |
| adamek | 7/10 | 5832 days | 1% |
| frederike | 8/10 | 5833 days | 1% |
| Karin Linder | 9/10 | 5852 days | 1% |
| Bue Verrept | 8/10 | 5855 days | 1% |
| Pia | 2/10 | 5859 days | 0% |
| Gebert | 8/10 | 5859 days | 1% |
| Daniel Alonso | 8/10 | 5860 days | 1% |
| Ana Garcia | 9/10 | 5861 days | 1% |
| Kelly | 10/10 | 6003 days | 1% |
| Johnnie | 8/10 | 6073 days | 1% |
| AndySwitzerland | 8/10 | 6076 days | 1% |
| suet | 7/10 | 6092 days | 1% |
| scottl | 7/10 | 6092 days | 1% |
| neeltjec | 9/10 | 6092 days | 1% |
| Martien van Brakel | 9/10 | 6092 days | 1% |
| BevanLisa | 8/10 | 6109 days | 1% |
| JeremyE | 8/10 | 6110 days | 1% |
| TessaW | 4/10 | 6110 days | 1% |
| LucyT | 10/10 | 6110 days | 1% |
| Florens | 8/10 | 6112 days | 1% |
| Joel | 7/10 | 6112 days | 1% |
| Tiemen | 7/10 | 6112 days | 1% |
| NikkiB1 | 9/10 | 6127 days | 1% |
| BrunoS | 9/10 | 6127 days | 1% |
| JoseB | 9/10 | 6134 days | 1% |
| Debbie | 9/10 | 6134 days | 1% |
| InkenGermany | 9/10 | 6134 days | 1% |
| John | 7/10 | 6141 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
-3.46% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 42 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 170 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 167 | -3.40% |
| 168 | -3.42% |
| 169 | -3.44% |
| 170 | -3.46% |
| 171 | -3.48% |
| 172 | -3.50% |
| 173 | -3.52% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
1.49% 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.