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 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.
Smiths Farm Holiday Park
Valid Reviews
159 Valid Reviews
The Smiths Farm Holiday Park experience has a total of 162 reviews. There are 159 valid reviews that are included when calculating the ranking score and 3 invalid reviews 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 159 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 116 |
|
73% |
| 9/10 | 28 |
|
18% |
| 8/10 | 13 |
|
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% |
96.10% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Smiths Farm Holiday Park valid reviews is 96.10% and is based on 159 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 159 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
97.37%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| james creed | 10/10 | 49 days | 100% |
| Martin | 9/10 | 49 days | 99% |
| Scott Asplin | 10/10 | 294 days | 95% |
| Viktoria | 10/10 | 294 days | 95% |
| Steve | 9/10 | 383 days | 91% |
| EI | 10/10 | 475 days | 87% |
| Andi | 10/10 | 475 days | 87% |
| Hannah | 8/10 | 475 days | 86% |
| Joe | 10/10 | 506 days | 86% |
| Aragorn | 10/10 | 659 days | 75% |
| Thomas | 10/10 | 749 days | 68% |
| Pierre and Martine | 10/10 | 749 days | 68% |
| Mike Howe | 10/10 | 749 days | 68% |
| Sebastian | 10/10 | 780 days | 65% |
| Thomas & Annette | 10/10 | 811 days | 63% |
| Anna | 10/10 | 872 days | 57% |
| Zoe M | 10/10 | 872 days | 57% |
| Thomas Engelhardt | 10/10 | 902 days | 54% |
| RM | 10/10 | 964 days | 47% |
| Corinne | 8/10 | 1025 days | 41% |
| ellie | 10/10 | 1025 days | 42% |
| Brendan | 10/10 | 1055 days | 39% |
| Steve | 10/10 | 1086 days | 36% |
| Milly | 10/10 | 1114 days | 34% |
| Sarah Woolley | 10/10 | 1114 days | 34% |
| Imme | 10/10 | 1145 days | 31% |
| Christian Wood | 10/10 | 1145 days | 31% |
| Kevin McCall | 10/10 | 1176 days | 29% |
| Ralph | 10/10 | 1541 days | 10% |
| Bex & Carl | 10/10 | 1541 days | 10% |
| Gem | 10/10 | 1571 days | 9% |
| Andrew | 10/10 | 1755 days | 5% |
| Kristine V | 10/10 | 1785 days | 5% |
| Barbora | 10/10 | 1844 days | 5% |
| Cloe | 10/10 | 2028 days | 5% |
| Kay | 8/10 | 2089 days | 4% |
| Isabella S | 10/10 | 2120 days | 4% |
| Elin Pranter | 10/10 | 2150 days | 4% |
| Zuzana and family | 10/10 | 2181 days | 4% |
| Just a guy | 10/10 | 2181 days | 4% |
| Liz Wade | 8/10 | 2210 days | 4% |
| Tom S | 10/10 | 2241 days | 4% |
| Erica | 8/10 | 2241 days | 4% |
| Dieter Giesen | 10/10 | 2241 days | 4% |
| Robert | 10/10 | 2272 days | 4% |
| Chris | 10/10 | 2272 days | 4% |
| Callum Mann | 10/10 | 2333 days | 4% |
| Martin Hansen | 10/10 | 2333 days | 4% |
| angelika19 | 10/10 | 2333 days | 4% |
| Anonymous | 10/10 | 2394 days | 4% |
| Anonymous | 10/10 | 2425 days | 4% |
| Nia | 9/10 | 2516 days | 4% |
| Maeike | 9/10 | 2547 days | 4% |
| Maika Laura | 10/10 | 2547 days | 4% |
| Axel & Sabine | 10/10 | 2547 days | 4% |
| Michael | 10/10 | 2575 days | 3% |
| Simone Maccagnan | 10/10 | 2606 days | 3% |
| Beate | 9/10 | 2606 days | 3% |
| Jonas and Lottie | 10/10 | 2637 days | 3% |
| Anita | 9/10 | 2637 days | 3% |
| Lance | 10/10 | 2667 days | 3% |
| Julia Thompson | 10/10 | 2667 days | 3% |
| Brett See | 10/10 | 2698 days | 3% |
| Grizzly Girl | 9/10 | 2698 days | 3% |
| kael Matthews | 9/10 | 2698 days | 3% |
| Kimberly | 10/10 | 2728 days | 3% |
| Jenna webber | 9/10 | 2728 days | 3% |
| Karina | 10/10 | 2912 days | 3% |
| Alde | 10/10 | 2912 days | 3% |
| The Weathersons | 9/10 | 2925 days | 2% |
| Tina Elsdon | 10/10 | 2971 days | 3% |
| Joanna du Toit | 9/10 | 3002 days | 3% |
| Nel Warnaar | 10/10 | 3007 days | 3% |
| Nigel Chapman | 10/10 | 3031 days | 3% |
| Craig Cini | 10/10 | 3096 days | 2% |
| Daniel Unkel | 10/10 | 3145 days | 2% |
| Eric Adelman | 10/10 | 3192 days | 2% |
| Jo Clarke | 8/10 | 3233 days | 2% |
| Jason Morehouse | 10/10 | 3277 days | 2% |
| Alan Brown | 5/10 | 3305 days | 2% |
| Matthias Wohlgemuth | 7/10 | 3319 days | 2% |
| Leilani Lemusu-Read | 10/10 | 3336 days | 2% |
| Kathrin Weigl | 10/10 | 3353 days | 2% |
| Yachar Tajamady | 10/10 | 3394 days | 2% |
| Tina Brill | 10/10 | 3428 days | 2% |
| Robert Ciarrocchi | 10/10 | 3495 days | 2% |
| Courtney | 10/10 | 3520 days | 2% |
| Cullen Wiginton | 10/10 | 3562 days | 2% |
| Alan Honey | 9/10 | 3592 days | 1% |
| Shaun Burns | 10/10 | 3600 days | 1% |
| Etienne Boeziek | 10/10 | 3604 days | 1% |
| Julia Clark | 9/10 | 3628 days | 1% |
| Sandra Kruse | 10/10 | 3630 days | 1% |
| Victoria Lee | 10/10 | 3710 days | 1% |
| Max Brunner | 10/10 | 3725 days | 1% |
| Hanna from Germany | 10/10 | 3737 days | 1% |
| Sarah Gurney | 10/10 | 3762 days | 1% |
| Ron Web | 10/10 | 3763 days | 1% |
| Claudius How | 10/10 | 3763 days | 1% |
| Jayne Lewis | 10/10 | 3763 days | 1% |
| Jade Duncan | 10/10 | 3781 days | 1% |
| Steve Warren | 10/10 | 3792 days | 1% |
| Megan | 10/10 | 3824 days | 1% |
| Nicolas Justin | 10/10 | 3998 days | 0% |
| Julia | 10/10 | 4008 days | 1% |
| John Wray | 10/10 | 4036 days | 1% |
| Constantin D | 10/10 | 4048 days | 1% |
| Jonathan Arndt | 10/10 | 4049 days | 1% |
| Virpi Andersson | 10/10 | 4067 days | 1% |
| Dieter Schmees | 9/10 | 4079 days | 0% |
| Manuela | 10/10 | 4094 days | 0% |
| Dieter & Lydia Schmees | 9/10 | 4098 days | 0% |
| Bert Snel | 10/10 | 4098 days | 0% |
| oren schnabel | 10/10 | 4098 days | 0% |
| SUE COLEMAN | 9/10 | 4098 days | 0% |
| Astrid Egesten | 9/10 | 4105 days | 0% |
| Gianpiero Rodari | 9/10 | 4128 days | 0% |
| sahni | 9/10 | 4312 days | 0% |
| Jan Legein | 10/10 | 4350 days | 0% |
| Josefin Lind | 9/10 | 4352 days | 0% |
| Herman Holmgist | 9/10 | 4352 days | 0% |
| Leeann Newton | 9/10 | 4399 days | 1% |
| Andrew Young | 10/10 | 4401 days | 1% |
| GN100 | 9/10 | 4401 days | 1% |
| Michael Turek | 10/10 | 4432 days | 1% |
| Linda Morey | 10/10 | 4432 days | 1% |
| Eric and Nienke | 8/10 | 4463 days | 1% |
| Julian Kemp | 10/10 | 4493 days | 1% |
| Steve Warren | 10/10 | 4524 days | 1% |
| PaulMacca | 10/10 | 4616 days | 1% |
| AoP | 10/10 | 4738 days | 1% |
| Penny Compton | 10/10 | 4738 days | 1% |
| Julian Roots | 8/10 | 4738 days | 1% |
| Helen and Ogi | 10/10 | 4751 days | 1% |
| Lis Bon | 10/10 | 4766 days | 1% |
| Pahlfamily | 10/10 | 4797 days | 1% |
| Joroen Borkert | 9/10 | 4815 days | 1% |
| Johannes OBerlin | 10/10 | 5100 days | 1% |
| Shavill | 10/10 | 5103 days | 1% |
| Michael Stoll | 10/10 | 5113 days | 1% |
| E Smudde | 8/10 | 5116 days | 1% |
| RhysWendy | 10/10 | 5163 days | 1% |
| Ken Jones | 9/10 | 5444 days | 1% |
| Steve Waterhouse | 8/10 | 5454 days | 1% |
| Jan Visser | 8/10 | 5469 days | 1% |
| Victoria Purver | 10/10 | 5472 days | 1% |
| Andrew Koster | 9/10 | 5482 days | 1% |
| Emma Edis-Bates | 9/10 | 5485 days | 1% |
| rhubarbsky | 10/10 | 5559 days | 1% |
| krisevelyn | 9/10 | 5773 days | 1% |
| Caitriona Doyle | 10/10 | 5856 days | 1% |
| Hanz | 10/10 | 5858 days | 1% |
| Linley Faulkner | 10/10 | 5862 days | 1% |
| EA Anders | 10/10 | 5879 days | 1% |
| Family van Hessem | 8/10 | 5882 days | 1% |
| Anna | 10/10 | 5932 days | 1% |
| Jessica Clarisse | 10/10 | 5936 days | 1% |
| Christine Suess | 10/10 | 5936 days | 1% |
| LindaV | 8/10 | 6202 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 Smiths Farm Holiday Park experience has plenty of reviews and does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
Recent Reviews Adjustment
-0.56% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 53 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 200 days. Due to the seasonal nature of many businesses, this adjustment is applied dynamically throughout the year.
The Smiths Farm Holiday Park experience has been adjusted for 27 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 24 | -0.50% |
| 25 | -0.52% |
| 26 | -0.54% |
| 27 | -0.56% |
| 28 | -0.58% |
| 29 | -0.60% |
| 30 | -0.62% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
0.27% 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
97%
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.