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
88.98%
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 | 17 days | 100% |
| Rich | 9/10 | 262 days | 97% |
| Jason C | 10/10 | 323 days | 96% |
| Donna | 10/10 | 323 days | 96% |
| Aoife | 8/10 | 505 days | 85% |
| Laura | 9/10 | 1085 days | 37% |
| Ferg | 10/10 | 1085 days | 37% |
| Inge | 8/10 | 1144 days | 31% |
| Cindi Wight | 9/10 | 1205 days | 27% |
| Sarah | 8/10 | 1236 days | 25% |
| Alexis | 10/10 | 2088 days | 5% |
| Cody | 10/10 | 2180 days | 4% |
| Mike Smith | 7/10 | 2240 days | 4% |
| Beth Carlton | 1/10 | 2301 days | 2% |
| Christian | 10/10 | 2574 days | 4% |
| Emma | 9/10 | 2605 days | 3% |
| Demi Thompson | 6/10 | 2666 days | 3% |
| Brett See | 9/10 | 2697 days | 3% |
| Mike Fricker | 9/10 | 2697 days | 3% |
| Urs Bruderer | 10/10 | 3385 days | 2% |
| Leslie Lindeman | 10/10 | 3597 days | 2% |
| Ray Tombs | 9/10 | 3600 days | 2% |
| Phillippa McLernon | 8/10 | 3658 days | 1% |
| Tine Fook | 6/10 | 3694 days | 1% |
| Jan Towers | 8/10 | 4339 days | 0% |
| Brita Topp | 8/10 | 4341 days | 0% |
| Mike Fricker | 8/10 | 4341 days | 0% |
| Mark Towers | 8/10 | 4372 days | 0% |
| Rikke Petersen | 9/10 | 4390 days | 1% |
| Ted Cole | 8/10 | 4400 days | 1% |
| Nigel | 8/10 | 4407 days | 1% |
| catherine welsh | 8/10 | 4431 days | 1% |
| Nigel & Annie Dale | 8/10 | 4492 days | 1% |
| ozelmer | 6/10 | 4553 days | 1% |
| AusCampa | 9/10 | 4676 days | 1% |
| Mark Wiggington | 7/10 | 4700 days | 1% |
| Ken Milligan | 8/10 | 4724 days | 1% |
| Gale Willcocks | 10/10 | 4730 days | 1% |
| Ken Richardson | 8/10 | 4730 days | 1% |
| Heather Macdonald | 9/10 | 4765 days | 1% |
| Nadine | 9/10 | 4809 days | 1% |
| Robert Staeller | 8/10 | 4812 days | 1% |
| David and Sally Wallis | 9/10 | 4818 days | 1% |
| Jackie and Brian | 8/10 | 4819 days | 1% |
| Peter | 10/10 | 4820 days | 1% |
| Julia Ramseier | 10/10 | 4839 days | 1% |
| Lisa Blake | 8/10 | 4843 days | 1% |
| Ton Franke | 8/10 | 4843 days | 1% |
| Megan Child | 9/10 | 4844 days | 1% |
| Jonathan Tuthill | 10/10 | 5087 days | 1% |
| Carly Braddock | 10/10 | 5091 days | 1% |
| Def Fem | 8/10 | 5097 days | 1% |
| launch | 7/10 | 5102 days | 1% |
| Michael Jefferies | 9/10 | 5105 days | 1% |
| Mark Bogton | 9/10 | 5111 days | 1% |
| Dominik Langenegger | 10/10 | 5113 days | 1% |
| Moehl | 9/10 | 5114 days | 1% |
| D Collier | 10/10 | 5115 days | 1% |
| Uwe Henze | 8/10 | 5116 days | 1% |
| Ute Rogawski | 7/10 | 5123 days | 1% |
| Nikita Sue | 7/10 | 5124 days | 1% |
| Heewin Otten | 10/10 | 5124 days | 1% |
| D R Valentine | 10/10 | 5125 days | 1% |
| Andreas Kristiansen | 9/10 | 5125 days | 1% |
| Petra | 10/10 | 5126 days | 1% |
| John Reynolds | 10/10 | 5126 days | 1% |
| Katie K | 10/10 | 5140 days | 1% |
| ZephyrTL | 8/10 | 5162 days | 1% |
| Peter, Noelle & Susanne | 10/10 | 5196 days | 1% |
| John & Myra Sloan | 9/10 | 5202 days | 1% |
| Jan & Marian | 10/10 | 5205 days | 1% |
| Andy Lever | 9/10 | 5208 days | 1% |
| Peter Spooner | 8/10 | 5210 days | 1% |
| damaca | 9/10 | 5284 days | 1% |
| Tacksharp | 9/10 | 5346 days | 1% |
| Edward Marhi | 9/10 | 5434 days | 1% |
| Weez18 | 10/10 | 5437 days | 1% |
| de Smedt | 9/10 | 5440 days | 1% |
| Eric Grant | 8/10 | 5442 days | 1% |
| Koen Vanlede | 8/10 | 5454 days | 1% |
| Sue Top | 10/10 | 5455 days | 1% |
| Marty Fey | 5/10 | 5459 days | 1% |
| Gord Carnochan | 9/10 | 5469 days | 1% |
| Pam & Rob Tellwright | 8/10 | 5472 days | 1% |
| Derek Puplett | 9/10 | 5472 days | 1% |
| Callum Sibbald | 8/10 | 5472 days | 1% |
| Gerlach | 8/10 | 5473 days | 1% |
| Agnes McMillan | 10/10 | 5480 days | 1% |
| Jill Dean | 8/10 | 5483 days | 1% |
| Philipp Rau | 8/10 | 5487 days | 1% |
| Eva Stauderova | 10/10 | 5487 days | 1% |
| Annette Mogg | 10/10 | 5492 days | 1% |
| Andrew Hammond | 8/10 | 5619 days | 1% |
| Betty le Brech | 8/10 | 5815 days | 1% |
| Ed & Pat Mitchell | 9/10 | 5841 days | 1% |
| Sue Bennett | 7/10 | 5843 days | 1% |
| Dieter Groscurth | 8/10 | 5843 days | 1% |
| Liz Pursey | 9/10 | 5853 days | 1% |
| pvo plas | 8/10 | 5855 days | 1% |
| Hoogh | 9/10 | 5858 days | 1% |
| Carina Raeder | 8/10 | 5859 days | 1% |
| John Rylance | 10/10 | 5860 days | 1% |
| Lamb | 9/10 | 5860 days | 1% |
| Tonny | 9/10 | 5860 days | 1% |
| Tim | 7/10 | 5861 days | 1% |
| Allan Bond | 7/10 | 5867 days | 1% |
| uleugel | 9/10 | 5870 days | 1% |
| Jeannot Robert | 10/10 | 5871 days | 1% |
| Norbert Hainz | 8/10 | 5874 days | 1% |
| Heino keyssler | 10/10 | 5881 days | 1% |
| T S | 10/10 | 5892 days | 1% |
| eliertv | 9/10 | 5907 days | 1% |
| adamek | 7/10 | 5907 days | 1% |
| frederike | 8/10 | 5908 days | 1% |
| Karin Linder | 9/10 | 5927 days | 1% |
| Bue Verrept | 8/10 | 5930 days | 1% |
| Pia | 2/10 | 5934 days | 0% |
| Gebert | 8/10 | 5934 days | 1% |
| Daniel Alonso | 8/10 | 5935 days | 1% |
| Ana Garcia | 9/10 | 5936 days | 1% |
| Kelly | 10/10 | 6078 days | 1% |
| Johnnie | 8/10 | 6148 days | 1% |
| AndySwitzerland | 8/10 | 6151 days | 1% |
| suet | 7/10 | 6167 days | 1% |
| scottl | 7/10 | 6167 days | 1% |
| neeltjec | 9/10 | 6167 days | 1% |
| Martien van Brakel | 9/10 | 6167 days | 1% |
| BevanLisa | 8/10 | 6184 days | 1% |
| JeremyE | 8/10 | 6185 days | 1% |
| TessaW | 4/10 | 6185 days | 1% |
| LucyT | 10/10 | 6185 days | 1% |
| Florens | 8/10 | 6187 days | 1% |
| Joel | 7/10 | 6187 days | 1% |
| Tiemen | 7/10 | 6187 days | 1% |
| NikkiB1 | 9/10 | 6202 days | 1% |
| BrunoS | 9/10 | 6202 days | 1% |
| JoseB | 9/10 | 6209 days | 1% |
| Debbie | 9/10 | 6209 days | 1% |
| InkenGermany | 9/10 | 6209 days | 1% |
| John | 7/10 | 6216 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
-0.04% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 53 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 2 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 0 | -0.00% |
| 1 | -0.02% |
| 2 | -0.04% |
| 3 | -0.06% |
| 4 | -0.08% |
| 5 | -0.10% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
1.15% 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.