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 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
157 Valid Reviews
The Smiths Farm Holiday Park experience has a total of 159 reviews. There are 157 valid reviews that are included when calculating the ranking score and 2 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 157 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 115 |
|
73% |
| 9/10 | 27 |
|
17% |
| 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% |
96.11% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Smiths Farm Holiday Park valid reviews is 96.11% and is based on 157 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 157 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
97.66%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Scott Asplin | 10/10 | 254 days | 100% |
| Viktoria | 10/10 | 254 days | 100% |
| Steve | 9/10 | 343 days | 96% |
| EI | 10/10 | 435 days | 93% |
| Andi | 10/10 | 435 days | 93% |
| Hannah | 8/10 | 435 days | 91% |
| Joe | 10/10 | 466 days | 91% |
| Aragorn | 10/10 | 619 days | 81% |
| Thomas | 10/10 | 709 days | 74% |
| Pierre and Martine | 10/10 | 709 days | 74% |
| Mike Howe | 10/10 | 709 days | 74% |
| Sebastian | 10/10 | 740 days | 71% |
| Thomas & Annette | 10/10 | 771 days | 69% |
| Anna | 10/10 | 832 days | 63% |
| Zoe M | 10/10 | 832 days | 63% |
| Thomas Engelhardt | 10/10 | 862 days | 60% |
| RM | 10/10 | 924 days | 53% |
| Corinne | 8/10 | 985 days | 46% |
| ellie | 10/10 | 985 days | 47% |
| Brendan | 10/10 | 1015 days | 44% |
| Steve | 10/10 | 1046 days | 41% |
| Milly | 10/10 | 1074 days | 39% |
| Sarah Woolley | 10/10 | 1074 days | 39% |
| Imme | 10/10 | 1105 days | 36% |
| Christian Wood | 10/10 | 1105 days | 36% |
| Kevin McCall | 10/10 | 1136 days | 33% |
| Ralph | 10/10 | 1501 days | 11% |
| Bex & Carl | 10/10 | 1501 days | 11% |
| Gem | 10/10 | 1531 days | 10% |
| Andrew | 10/10 | 1715 days | 6% |
| Kristine V | 10/10 | 1745 days | 6% |
| Barbora | 10/10 | 1804 days | 5% |
| Cloe | 10/10 | 1988 days | 5% |
| Kay | 8/10 | 2049 days | 5% |
| Isabella S | 10/10 | 2080 days | 5% |
| Elin Pranter | 10/10 | 2110 days | 5% |
| Zuzana and family | 10/10 | 2141 days | 5% |
| Just a guy | 10/10 | 2141 days | 5% |
| Liz Wade | 8/10 | 2170 days | 4% |
| Tom S | 10/10 | 2201 days | 4% |
| Erica | 8/10 | 2201 days | 4% |
| Dieter Giesen | 10/10 | 2201 days | 4% |
| Robert | 10/10 | 2232 days | 4% |
| Chris | 10/10 | 2232 days | 4% |
| Callum Mann | 10/10 | 2293 days | 4% |
| Martin Hansen | 10/10 | 2293 days | 4% |
| angelika19 | 10/10 | 2293 days | 4% |
| Anonymous | 10/10 | 2354 days | 4% |
| Anonymous | 10/10 | 2385 days | 4% |
| Nia | 9/10 | 2476 days | 4% |
| Maeike | 9/10 | 2507 days | 4% |
| Maika Laura | 10/10 | 2507 days | 4% |
| Axel & Sabine | 10/10 | 2507 days | 4% |
| Michael | 10/10 | 2535 days | 4% |
| Simone Maccagnan | 10/10 | 2566 days | 4% |
| Beate | 9/10 | 2566 days | 4% |
| Jonas and Lottie | 10/10 | 2597 days | 4% |
| Anita | 9/10 | 2597 days | 4% |
| Lance | 10/10 | 2627 days | 4% |
| Julia Thompson | 10/10 | 2627 days | 4% |
| Brett See | 10/10 | 2658 days | 3% |
| Grizzly Girl | 9/10 | 2658 days | 3% |
| kael Matthews | 9/10 | 2658 days | 3% |
| Kimberly | 10/10 | 2688 days | 3% |
| Jenna webber | 9/10 | 2688 days | 3% |
| Karina | 10/10 | 2872 days | 3% |
| Alde | 10/10 | 2872 days | 3% |
| The Weathersons | 9/10 | 2885 days | 2% |
| Tina Elsdon | 10/10 | 2931 days | 3% |
| Joanna du Toit | 9/10 | 2962 days | 3% |
| Nel Warnaar | 10/10 | 2967 days | 3% |
| Nigel Chapman | 10/10 | 2991 days | 3% |
| Craig Cini | 10/10 | 3056 days | 3% |
| Daniel Unkel | 10/10 | 3105 days | 3% |
| Eric Adelman | 10/10 | 3152 days | 2% |
| Jo Clarke | 8/10 | 3193 days | 2% |
| Jason Morehouse | 10/10 | 3237 days | 2% |
| Alan Brown | 5/10 | 3265 days | 2% |
| Matthias Wohlgemuth | 7/10 | 3279 days | 2% |
| Leilani Lemusu-Read | 10/10 | 3296 days | 2% |
| Kathrin Weigl | 10/10 | 3313 days | 2% |
| Yachar Tajamady | 10/10 | 3354 days | 2% |
| Tina Brill | 10/10 | 3388 days | 2% |
| Robert Ciarrocchi | 10/10 | 3455 days | 2% |
| Courtney | 10/10 | 3480 days | 2% |
| Cullen Wiginton | 10/10 | 3522 days | 2% |
| Alan Honey | 9/10 | 3552 days | 2% |
| Shaun Burns | 10/10 | 3560 days | 2% |
| Etienne Boeziek | 10/10 | 3564 days | 2% |
| Julia Clark | 9/10 | 3588 days | 2% |
| Sandra Kruse | 10/10 | 3590 days | 2% |
| Victoria Lee | 10/10 | 3670 days | 1% |
| Max Brunner | 10/10 | 3685 days | 1% |
| Hanna from Germany | 10/10 | 3697 days | 1% |
| Sarah Gurney | 10/10 | 3722 days | 1% |
| Ron Web | 10/10 | 3723 days | 1% |
| Claudius How | 10/10 | 3723 days | 1% |
| Jayne Lewis | 10/10 | 3723 days | 1% |
| Jade Duncan | 10/10 | 3741 days | 1% |
| Steve Warren | 10/10 | 3752 days | 1% |
| Megan | 10/10 | 3784 days | 1% |
| Nicolas Justin | 10/10 | 3958 days | 1% |
| Julia | 10/10 | 3968 days | 1% |
| John Wray | 10/10 | 3996 days | 1% |
| Constantin D | 10/10 | 4008 days | 1% |
| Jonathan Arndt | 10/10 | 4009 days | 1% |
| Virpi Andersson | 10/10 | 4027 days | 1% |
| Dieter Schmees | 9/10 | 4039 days | 0% |
| Manuela | 10/10 | 4054 days | 0% |
| Dieter & Lydia Schmees | 9/10 | 4058 days | 1% |
| Bert Snel | 10/10 | 4058 days | 1% |
| oren schnabel | 10/10 | 4058 days | 1% |
| SUE COLEMAN | 9/10 | 4058 days | 1% |
| Astrid Egesten | 9/10 | 4065 days | 0% |
| Gianpiero Rodari | 9/10 | 4088 days | 1% |
| sahni | 9/10 | 4272 days | 0% |
| Jan Legein | 10/10 | 4310 days | 0% |
| Josefin Lind | 9/10 | 4312 days | 0% |
| Herman Holmgist | 9/10 | 4312 days | 0% |
| Leeann Newton | 9/10 | 4359 days | 0% |
| Andrew Young | 10/10 | 4361 days | 0% |
| GN100 | 9/10 | 4361 days | 0% |
| Michael Turek | 10/10 | 4392 days | 1% |
| Linda Morey | 10/10 | 4392 days | 1% |
| Eric and Nienke | 8/10 | 4423 days | 1% |
| Julian Kemp | 10/10 | 4453 days | 1% |
| Steve Warren | 10/10 | 4484 days | 1% |
| PaulMacca | 10/10 | 4576 days | 1% |
| AoP | 10/10 | 4698 days | 1% |
| Penny Compton | 10/10 | 4698 days | 1% |
| Julian Roots | 8/10 | 4698 days | 1% |
| Helen and Ogi | 10/10 | 4711 days | 1% |
| Lis Bon | 10/10 | 4726 days | 1% |
| Pahlfamily | 10/10 | 4757 days | 1% |
| Joroen Borkert | 9/10 | 4775 days | 1% |
| Johannes OBerlin | 10/10 | 5060 days | 1% |
| Shavill | 10/10 | 5063 days | 1% |
| Michael Stoll | 10/10 | 5073 days | 1% |
| E Smudde | 8/10 | 5076 days | 1% |
| RhysWendy | 10/10 | 5123 days | 1% |
| Ken Jones | 9/10 | 5404 days | 1% |
| Steve Waterhouse | 8/10 | 5414 days | 1% |
| Jan Visser | 8/10 | 5429 days | 1% |
| Victoria Purver | 10/10 | 5432 days | 1% |
| Andrew Koster | 9/10 | 5442 days | 1% |
| Emma Edis-Bates | 9/10 | 5445 days | 1% |
| rhubarbsky | 10/10 | 5519 days | 1% |
| krisevelyn | 9/10 | 5733 days | 1% |
| Caitriona Doyle | 10/10 | 5816 days | 1% |
| Hanz | 10/10 | 5818 days | 1% |
| Linley Faulkner | 10/10 | 5822 days | 1% |
| EA Anders | 10/10 | 5839 days | 1% |
| Family van Hessem | 8/10 | 5842 days | 1% |
| Anna | 10/10 | 5892 days | 1% |
| Jessica Clarisse | 10/10 | 5896 days | 1% |
| Christine Suess | 10/10 | 5896 days | 1% |
| LindaV | 8/10 | 6162 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
-4.05% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 44 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 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
0.57% 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
94%
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.