Ranking Score Explained

Hi there, 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 Smiths Farm Holiday Park.

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.

Nick Morrison's avatar

Nick Morrison

Rankers owner

Smiths Farm Holiday Park

Valid Reviews

103 Valid Reviews

The Smiths Farm Holiday Park experience has a total of 104 reviews. There are 103 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 103 valid reviews:

Rating Count Percentage
10/10 69
67%
9/10 24
23%
8/10 8
8%
7/10 1
1%
6/10 0
0%
5/10 1
1%
4/10 0
0%
3/10 0
0%
2/10 0
0%
1/10 0
0%

95.34% Average

The raw data average (mean) for all the Smiths Farm Holiday Park valid reviews is 95.34% and is based on 103 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

29 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 103 valid reviews, the experience has 29 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.

Below is the distribution of ratings for the 29 face-to-face reviews:

Rating Count Percentage
10/10 13
45%
9/10 11
38%
8/10 5
17%
7/10 0
0%
6/10 0
0%
5/10 0
0%
4/10 0
0%
3/10 0
0%
2/10 0
0%
1/10 0
0%

92.76% Average

The raw data average (mean) for all the Smiths Farm Holiday Park face-to-face reviews is 92.76% and is based on 29 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.

Weighted Average

95.41%

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 Face-to-Face Weight Relative Weight
Simone Maccagnan 10/10 52 days 99.57 100%
Beate 9/10 52 days 99.57 100%
Jonas and Lottie 10/10 83 days 98.91 99%
Anita 9/10 83 days 98.91 99%
Lance 10/10 113 days 97.98 98%
Julia Thompson 10/10 113 days 97.98 98%
Brett See 10/10 144 days 96.71 97%
Grizzly Girl 9/10 144 days 96.71 97%
kael Matthews 9/10 144 days 96.71 97%
Kimberly 10/10 174 days 95.2 96%
Jenna webber 9/10 174 days 95.2 96%
Karina 10/10 358 days 79.69 80%
Alde 10/10 358 days 79.69 80%
The Weathersons 9/10 371 days true 93.83 94%
Tina Elsdon 10/10 416 days 72.58 72%
Joanna du Toit 9/10 447 days 68.34 68%
Nel Warnaar 10/10 453 days 67.48 67%
Nigel Chapman 10/10 477 days 63.95 64%
Craig Cini 10/10 542 days 53.45 53%
Daniel Unkel 10/10 591 days 45.25 44%
Eric Adelman 10/10 638 days 38.09 37%
Jo Clarke 8/10 679 days 32.42 31%
Jason Morehouse 10/10 722 days 27.05 26%
Alan Brown 5/10 751 days 23.75 22%
Matthias Wohlgemuth 7/10 765 days 22.26 21%
Leilani Lemusu-Read 10/10 781 days 20.62 19%
Kathrin Weigl 10/10 799 days 18.88 17%
Yachar Tajamady 10/10 840 days 15.3 14%
Tina Brill 10/10 873 days 12.81 11%
Robert Ciarrocchi 10/10 941 days 8.76 7%
Courtney 10/10 966 days 7.64 6%
Cullen Wiginton 10/10 1008 days 6.2 4%
Alan Honey 9/10 1038 days 5.51 4%
Shaun Burns 10/10 1046 days 5.38 4%
Etienne Boeziek 10/10 1050 days 5.32 4%
Julia Clark 9/10 1074 days 5.07 3%
Sandra Kruse 10/10 1076 days 5.06 3%
Victoria Lee 10/10 1156 days 4.92 3%
Max Brunner 10/10 1171 days 4.9 3%
Hanna from Germany 10/10 1183 days 4.88 3%
Sarah Gurney 10/10 1208 days 4.85 3%
Ron Web 10/10 1208 days 4.85 3%
Claudius How 10/10 1209 days 4.84 3%
Jayne Lewis 10/10 1209 days 4.84 3%
Jade Duncan 10/10 1227 days 4.82 3%
Steve Warren 10/10 1238 days 4.8 3%
Megan 10/10 1269 days 4.76 3%
Nicolas Justin 10/10 1444 days true 5.43 4%
Julia 10/10 1453 days 4.51 3%
John Wray 10/10 1481 days 4.47 3%
Constantin D 10/10 1494 days 4.45 3%
Jonathan Arndt 10/10 1495 days 4.45 3%
Virpi Andersson 10/10 1512 days 4.43 3%
Dieter Schmees 9/10 1525 days true 5.29 4%
Manuela 10/10 1540 days true 5.27 4%
Dieter & Lydia Schmees 9/10 1543 days 4.39 3%
Bert Snel 10/10 1543 days 4.39 3%
oren schnabel 10/10 1543 days 4.39 3%
SUE COLEMAN 9/10 1543 days 4.39 3%
Astrid Egesten 9/10 1551 days true 5.25 4%
Gianpiero Rodari 9/10 1573 days 4.35 3%
sahni 9/10 1758 days 4.09 2%
Jan Legein 10/10 1796 days true 4.85 3%
Josefin Lind 9/10 1798 days true 4.84 3%
Herman Holmgist 9/10 1798 days true 4.84 3%
Leeann Newton 9/10 1845 days true 4.77 3%
Andrew Young 10/10 1847 days 3.97 2%
GN100 9/10 1847 days 3.97 2%
Michael Turek 10/10 1878 days 3.93 2%
Linda Morey 10/10 1878 days 3.93 2%
Eric and Nienke 8/10 1909 days 3.88 2%
Julian Kemp 10/10 1939 days 3.84 2%
Steve Warren 10/10 1970 days 3.8 2%
PaulMacca 10/10 2062 days 3.68 2%
AoP 10/10 2184 days 3.51 2%
Penny Compton 10/10 2184 days 3.51 2%
Julian Roots 8/10 2184 days 3.51 2%
Helen and Ogi 10/10 2197 days true 4.19 2%
Lis Bon 10/10 2212 days 3.47 2%
Pahlfamily 10/10 2243 days 3.43 2%
Joroen Borkert 9/10 2261 days true 4.08 2%
Johannes OBerlin 10/10 2546 days true 3.61 2%
Shavill 10/10 2549 days 3.01 1%
Michael Stoll 10/10 2559 days true 3.59 2%
E Smudde 8/10 2562 days true 3.59 2%
RhysWendy 10/10 2609 days 2.93 1%
Ken Jones 9/10 2890 days true 3.05 1%
Steve Waterhouse 8/10 2900 days true 3.03 1%
Jan Visser 8/10 2915 days true 3.01 1%
Victoria Purver 10/10 2918 days true 3.0 1%
Andrew Koster 9/10 2928 days true 2.99 1%
Emma Edis-Bates 9/10 2931 days true 2.98 1%
rhubarbsky 10/10 3005 days 2.38 1%
krisevelyn 9/10 3219 days true 2.51 1%
Caitriona Doyle 10/10 3302 days true 2.37 1%
Hanz 10/10 3304 days true 2.37 1%
Linley Faulkner 10/10 3308 days 1.97 0%
EA Anders 10/10 3325 days true 2.33 1%
Family van Hessem 8/10 3328 days true 2.33 1%
Anna 10/10 3378 days true 2.25 0%
Jessica Clarisse 10/10 3382 days true 2.24 0%
Christine Suess 10/10 3382 days true 2.24 0%
LindaV 8/10 3648 days true 1.8 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 Smiths Farm Holiday Park experience has plenty of reviews and does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.

Recent Reviews Adjustment

-0.68% Adjustment

There may be an adjustment if an experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 60 days. However the Smiths Farm Holiday Park 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 364 days.

The Smiths Farm Holiday Park experience has been adjusted for 34 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.

Days Adjustment
31 -0.62%
32 -0.64%
33 -0.66%
34 -0.68%
35 -0.70%
36 -0.72%
37 -0.74%

Final Ranking Score

95%

The final ranking score once adjustments and rounding has been applied. This value is cached and recalculated each day. Therefore it may not be precisely accurate based on the other values presented.

If you have any questions or comments about our ranking score calculation please get in touch at info@rankers.co.nz.