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
90.28%
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 | 222 days | 100% |
| Jason C | 10/10 | 283 days | 99% |
| Donna | 10/10 | 283 days | 99% |
| Aoife | 8/10 | 465 days | 89% |
| Laura | 9/10 | 1045 days | 41% |
| Ferg | 10/10 | 1045 days | 41% |
| Inge | 8/10 | 1104 days | 35% |
| Cindi Wight | 9/10 | 1165 days | 31% |
| Sarah | 8/10 | 1196 days | 28% |
| Alexis | 10/10 | 2048 days | 5% |
| Cody | 10/10 | 2140 days | 5% |
| Mike Smith | 7/10 | 2200 days | 4% |
| Beth Carlton | 1/10 | 2261 days | 2% |
| Christian | 10/10 | 2534 days | 4% |
| Emma | 9/10 | 2565 days | 4% |
| Demi Thompson | 6/10 | 2626 days | 3% |
| Brett See | 9/10 | 2657 days | 3% |
| Mike Fricker | 9/10 | 2657 days | 3% |
| Urs Bruderer | 10/10 | 3345 days | 2% |
| Leslie Lindeman | 10/10 | 3557 days | 2% |
| Ray Tombs | 9/10 | 3560 days | 2% |
| Phillippa McLernon | 8/10 | 3618 days | 1% |
| Tine Fook | 6/10 | 3654 days | 1% |
| Jan Towers | 8/10 | 4299 days | 0% |
| Brita Topp | 8/10 | 4301 days | 0% |
| Mike Fricker | 8/10 | 4301 days | 0% |
| Mark Towers | 8/10 | 4332 days | 0% |
| Rikke Petersen | 9/10 | 4350 days | 0% |
| Ted Cole | 8/10 | 4360 days | 0% |
| Nigel | 8/10 | 4367 days | 0% |
| catherine welsh | 8/10 | 4391 days | 1% |
| Nigel & Annie Dale | 8/10 | 4452 days | 1% |
| ozelmer | 6/10 | 4513 days | 1% |
| AusCampa | 9/10 | 4636 days | 1% |
| Mark Wiggington | 7/10 | 4660 days | 1% |
| Ken Milligan | 8/10 | 4684 days | 1% |
| Gale Willcocks | 10/10 | 4690 days | 1% |
| Ken Richardson | 8/10 | 4690 days | 1% |
| Heather Macdonald | 9/10 | 4725 days | 1% |
| Nadine | 9/10 | 4769 days | 1% |
| Robert Staeller | 8/10 | 4772 days | 1% |
| David and Sally Wallis | 9/10 | 4778 days | 1% |
| Jackie and Brian | 8/10 | 4779 days | 1% |
| Peter | 10/10 | 4780 days | 1% |
| Julia Ramseier | 10/10 | 4799 days | 1% |
| Lisa Blake | 8/10 | 4803 days | 1% |
| Ton Franke | 8/10 | 4803 days | 1% |
| Megan Child | 9/10 | 4804 days | 1% |
| Jonathan Tuthill | 10/10 | 5047 days | 1% |
| Carly Braddock | 10/10 | 5051 days | 1% |
| Def Fem | 8/10 | 5057 days | 1% |
| launch | 7/10 | 5062 days | 1% |
| Michael Jefferies | 9/10 | 5065 days | 1% |
| Mark Bogton | 9/10 | 5071 days | 1% |
| Dominik Langenegger | 10/10 | 5073 days | 1% |
| Moehl | 9/10 | 5074 days | 1% |
| D Collier | 10/10 | 5075 days | 1% |
| Uwe Henze | 8/10 | 5076 days | 1% |
| Ute Rogawski | 7/10 | 5083 days | 1% |
| Nikita Sue | 7/10 | 5084 days | 1% |
| Heewin Otten | 10/10 | 5084 days | 1% |
| D R Valentine | 10/10 | 5085 days | 1% |
| Andreas Kristiansen | 9/10 | 5085 days | 1% |
| Petra | 10/10 | 5086 days | 1% |
| John Reynolds | 10/10 | 5086 days | 1% |
| Katie K | 10/10 | 5100 days | 1% |
| ZephyrTL | 8/10 | 5122 days | 1% |
| Peter, Noelle & Susanne | 10/10 | 5156 days | 1% |
| John & Myra Sloan | 9/10 | 5162 days | 1% |
| Jan & Marian | 10/10 | 5165 days | 1% |
| Andy Lever | 9/10 | 5168 days | 1% |
| Peter Spooner | 8/10 | 5170 days | 1% |
| damaca | 9/10 | 5244 days | 1% |
| Tacksharp | 9/10 | 5306 days | 1% |
| Edward Marhi | 9/10 | 5394 days | 1% |
| Weez18 | 10/10 | 5397 days | 1% |
| de Smedt | 9/10 | 5400 days | 1% |
| Eric Grant | 8/10 | 5402 days | 1% |
| Koen Vanlede | 8/10 | 5414 days | 1% |
| Sue Top | 10/10 | 5415 days | 1% |
| Marty Fey | 5/10 | 5419 days | 1% |
| Gord Carnochan | 9/10 | 5429 days | 1% |
| Pam & Rob Tellwright | 8/10 | 5432 days | 1% |
| Derek Puplett | 9/10 | 5432 days | 1% |
| Callum Sibbald | 8/10 | 5432 days | 1% |
| Gerlach | 8/10 | 5433 days | 1% |
| Agnes McMillan | 10/10 | 5440 days | 1% |
| Jill Dean | 8/10 | 5443 days | 1% |
| Philipp Rau | 8/10 | 5447 days | 1% |
| Eva Stauderova | 10/10 | 5447 days | 1% |
| Annette Mogg | 10/10 | 5452 days | 1% |
| Andrew Hammond | 8/10 | 5579 days | 1% |
| Betty le Brech | 8/10 | 5775 days | 1% |
| Ed & Pat Mitchell | 9/10 | 5801 days | 1% |
| Sue Bennett | 7/10 | 5803 days | 1% |
| Dieter Groscurth | 8/10 | 5803 days | 1% |
| Liz Pursey | 9/10 | 5813 days | 1% |
| pvo plas | 8/10 | 5815 days | 1% |
| Hoogh | 9/10 | 5818 days | 1% |
| Carina Raeder | 8/10 | 5819 days | 1% |
| John Rylance | 10/10 | 5820 days | 1% |
| Lamb | 9/10 | 5820 days | 1% |
| Tonny | 9/10 | 5820 days | 1% |
| Tim | 7/10 | 5821 days | 1% |
| Allan Bond | 7/10 | 5827 days | 1% |
| uleugel | 9/10 | 5830 days | 1% |
| Jeannot Robert | 10/10 | 5831 days | 1% |
| Norbert Hainz | 8/10 | 5834 days | 1% |
| Heino keyssler | 10/10 | 5841 days | 1% |
| T S | 10/10 | 5852 days | 1% |
| eliertv | 9/10 | 5867 days | 1% |
| adamek | 7/10 | 5867 days | 1% |
| frederike | 8/10 | 5868 days | 1% |
| Karin Linder | 9/10 | 5887 days | 1% |
| Bue Verrept | 8/10 | 5890 days | 1% |
| Pia | 2/10 | 5894 days | 0% |
| Gebert | 8/10 | 5894 days | 1% |
| Daniel Alonso | 8/10 | 5895 days | 1% |
| Ana Garcia | 9/10 | 5896 days | 1% |
| Kelly | 10/10 | 6038 days | 1% |
| Johnnie | 8/10 | 6108 days | 1% |
| AndySwitzerland | 8/10 | 6111 days | 1% |
| suet | 7/10 | 6127 days | 1% |
| scottl | 7/10 | 6127 days | 1% |
| neeltjec | 9/10 | 6127 days | 1% |
| Martien van Brakel | 9/10 | 6127 days | 1% |
| BevanLisa | 8/10 | 6144 days | 1% |
| JeremyE | 8/10 | 6145 days | 1% |
| TessaW | 4/10 | 6145 days | 1% |
| LucyT | 10/10 | 6145 days | 1% |
| Florens | 8/10 | 6147 days | 1% |
| Joel | 7/10 | 6147 days | 1% |
| Tiemen | 7/10 | 6147 days | 1% |
| NikkiB1 | 9/10 | 6162 days | 1% |
| BrunoS | 9/10 | 6162 days | 1% |
| JoseB | 9/10 | 6169 days | 1% |
| Debbie | 9/10 | 6169 days | 1% |
| InkenGermany | 9/10 | 6169 days | 1% |
| John | 7/10 | 6176 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
-4.05% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 43 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 | -3.99% |
| 198 | -4.01% |
| 199 | -4.03% |
| 200 | -4.05% |
| 201 | -4.07% |
| 202 | -4.09% |
| 203 | -4.11% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
1.59% 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.