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
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
97.69%
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 | 218 days | 100% |
| Viktoria | 10/10 | 218 days | 100% |
| Steve | 9/10 | 307 days | 96% |
| EI | 10/10 | 399 days | 93% |
| Andi | 10/10 | 399 days | 93% |
| Hannah | 8/10 | 399 days | 92% |
| Joe | 10/10 | 430 days | 92% |
| Aragorn | 10/10 | 583 days | 83% |
| Thomas | 10/10 | 673 days | 76% |
| Pierre and Martine | 10/10 | 673 days | 76% |
| Mike Howe | 10/10 | 673 days | 76% |
| Sebastian | 10/10 | 704 days | 74% |
| Thomas & Annette | 10/10 | 735 days | 71% |
| Anna | 10/10 | 796 days | 66% |
| Zoe M | 10/10 | 796 days | 66% |
| Thomas Engelhardt | 10/10 | 826 days | 63% |
| RM | 10/10 | 888 days | 57% |
| Corinne | 8/10 | 949 days | 49% |
| ellie | 10/10 | 949 days | 50% |
| Brendan | 10/10 | 979 days | 47% |
| Steve | 10/10 | 1010 days | 44% |
| Milly | 10/10 | 1038 days | 41% |
| Sarah Woolley | 10/10 | 1038 days | 41% |
| Imme | 10/10 | 1069 days | 39% |
| Christian Wood | 10/10 | 1069 days | 39% |
| Kevin McCall | 10/10 | 1100 days | 36% |
| Ralph | 10/10 | 1465 days | 13% |
| Bex & Carl | 10/10 | 1465 days | 13% |
| Gem | 10/10 | 1495 days | 11% |
| Andrew | 10/10 | 1679 days | 6% |
| Kristine V | 10/10 | 1709 days | 6% |
| Barbora | 10/10 | 1768 days | 5% |
| Cloe | 10/10 | 1952 days | 5% |
| Kay | 8/10 | 2013 days | 5% |
| Isabella S | 10/10 | 2044 days | 5% |
| Elin Pranter | 10/10 | 2074 days | 5% |
| Zuzana and family | 10/10 | 2105 days | 5% |
| Just a guy | 10/10 | 2105 days | 5% |
| Liz Wade | 8/10 | 2133 days | 4% |
| Tom S | 10/10 | 2165 days | 4% |
| Erica | 8/10 | 2165 days | 4% |
| Dieter Giesen | 10/10 | 2165 days | 4% |
| Robert | 10/10 | 2196 days | 4% |
| Chris | 10/10 | 2196 days | 4% |
| Callum Mann | 10/10 | 2257 days | 4% |
| Martin Hansen | 10/10 | 2257 days | 4% |
| angelika19 | 10/10 | 2257 days | 4% |
| Anonymous | 10/10 | 2318 days | 4% |
| Anonymous | 10/10 | 2349 days | 4% |
| Nia | 9/10 | 2440 days | 4% |
| Maeike | 9/10 | 2471 days | 4% |
| Maika Laura | 10/10 | 2471 days | 4% |
| Axel & Sabine | 10/10 | 2471 days | 4% |
| Michael | 10/10 | 2499 days | 4% |
| Simone Maccagnan | 10/10 | 2530 days | 4% |
| Beate | 9/10 | 2530 days | 4% |
| Jonas and Lottie | 10/10 | 2561 days | 4% |
| Anita | 9/10 | 2561 days | 4% |
| Lance | 10/10 | 2591 days | 4% |
| Julia Thompson | 10/10 | 2591 days | 4% |
| Brett See | 10/10 | 2622 days | 3% |
| Grizzly Girl | 9/10 | 2622 days | 3% |
| kael Matthews | 9/10 | 2622 days | 3% |
| Kimberly | 10/10 | 2652 days | 3% |
| Jenna webber | 9/10 | 2652 days | 3% |
| Karina | 10/10 | 2836 days | 3% |
| Alde | 10/10 | 2836 days | 3% |
| The Weathersons | 9/10 | 2849 days | 2% |
| Tina Elsdon | 10/10 | 2894 days | 3% |
| Joanna du Toit | 9/10 | 2925 days | 3% |
| Nel Warnaar | 10/10 | 2931 days | 3% |
| Nigel Chapman | 10/10 | 2955 days | 3% |
| Craig Cini | 10/10 | 3020 days | 3% |
| Daniel Unkel | 10/10 | 3069 days | 3% |
| Eric Adelman | 10/10 | 3116 days | 2% |
| Jo Clarke | 8/10 | 3157 days | 2% |
| Jason Morehouse | 10/10 | 3200 days | 2% |
| Alan Brown | 5/10 | 3229 days | 2% |
| Matthias Wohlgemuth | 7/10 | 3243 days | 2% |
| Leilani Lemusu-Read | 10/10 | 3259 days | 2% |
| Kathrin Weigl | 10/10 | 3277 days | 2% |
| Yachar Tajamady | 10/10 | 3318 days | 2% |
| Tina Brill | 10/10 | 3351 days | 2% |
| Robert Ciarrocchi | 10/10 | 3419 days | 2% |
| Courtney | 10/10 | 3444 days | 2% |
| Cullen Wiginton | 10/10 | 3486 days | 2% |
| Alan Honey | 9/10 | 3516 days | 2% |
| Shaun Burns | 10/10 | 3524 days | 2% |
| Etienne Boeziek | 10/10 | 3528 days | 2% |
| Julia Clark | 9/10 | 3552 days | 2% |
| Sandra Kruse | 10/10 | 3554 days | 2% |
| Victoria Lee | 10/10 | 3634 days | 1% |
| Max Brunner | 10/10 | 3649 days | 1% |
| Hanna from Germany | 10/10 | 3661 days | 1% |
| Sarah Gurney | 10/10 | 3686 days | 1% |
| Ron Web | 10/10 | 3686 days | 1% |
| Claudius How | 10/10 | 3687 days | 1% |
| Jayne Lewis | 10/10 | 3687 days | 1% |
| Jade Duncan | 10/10 | 3705 days | 1% |
| Steve Warren | 10/10 | 3716 days | 1% |
| Megan | 10/10 | 3747 days | 1% |
| Nicolas Justin | 10/10 | 3922 days | 1% |
| Julia | 10/10 | 3931 days | 1% |
| John Wray | 10/10 | 3959 days | 1% |
| Constantin D | 10/10 | 3972 days | 1% |
| Jonathan Arndt | 10/10 | 3973 days | 1% |
| Virpi Andersson | 10/10 | 3990 days | 1% |
| Dieter Schmees | 9/10 | 4003 days | 0% |
| Manuela | 10/10 | 4018 days | 0% |
| Dieter & Lydia Schmees | 9/10 | 4021 days | 1% |
| Bert Snel | 10/10 | 4021 days | 1% |
| oren schnabel | 10/10 | 4021 days | 1% |
| SUE COLEMAN | 9/10 | 4021 days | 1% |
| Astrid Egesten | 9/10 | 4029 days | 0% |
| Gianpiero Rodari | 9/10 | 4051 days | 1% |
| sahni | 9/10 | 4236 days | 0% |
| Jan Legein | 10/10 | 4274 days | 0% |
| Josefin Lind | 9/10 | 4276 days | 0% |
| Herman Holmgist | 9/10 | 4276 days | 0% |
| Leeann Newton | 9/10 | 4323 days | 0% |
| Andrew Young | 10/10 | 4325 days | 0% |
| GN100 | 9/10 | 4325 days | 0% |
| Michael Turek | 10/10 | 4356 days | 0% |
| Linda Morey | 10/10 | 4356 days | 0% |
| Eric and Nienke | 8/10 | 4387 days | 1% |
| Julian Kemp | 10/10 | 4417 days | 1% |
| Steve Warren | 10/10 | 4448 days | 1% |
| PaulMacca | 10/10 | 4540 days | 1% |
| AoP | 10/10 | 4662 days | 1% |
| Penny Compton | 10/10 | 4662 days | 1% |
| Julian Roots | 8/10 | 4662 days | 1% |
| Helen and Ogi | 10/10 | 4675 days | 1% |
| Lis Bon | 10/10 | 4690 days | 1% |
| Pahlfamily | 10/10 | 4721 days | 1% |
| Joroen Borkert | 9/10 | 4739 days | 1% |
| Johannes OBerlin | 10/10 | 5024 days | 1% |
| Shavill | 10/10 | 5027 days | 1% |
| Michael Stoll | 10/10 | 5037 days | 1% |
| E Smudde | 8/10 | 5040 days | 1% |
| RhysWendy | 10/10 | 5087 days | 1% |
| Ken Jones | 9/10 | 5368 days | 1% |
| Steve Waterhouse | 8/10 | 5378 days | 1% |
| Jan Visser | 8/10 | 5393 days | 1% |
| Victoria Purver | 10/10 | 5396 days | 1% |
| Andrew Koster | 9/10 | 5406 days | 1% |
| Emma Edis-Bates | 9/10 | 5409 days | 1% |
| rhubarbsky | 10/10 | 5483 days | 1% |
| krisevelyn | 9/10 | 5697 days | 1% |
| Caitriona Doyle | 10/10 | 5780 days | 1% |
| Hanz | 10/10 | 5782 days | 1% |
| Linley Faulkner | 10/10 | 5786 days | 1% |
| EA Anders | 10/10 | 5803 days | 1% |
| Family van Hessem | 8/10 | 5806 days | 1% |
| Anna | 10/10 | 5856 days | 1% |
| Jessica Clarisse | 10/10 | 5860 days | 1% |
| Christine Suess | 10/10 | 5860 days | 1% |
| LindaV | 8/10 | 6126 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
-4.07% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 42 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 | -4.01% |
| 198 | -4.03% |
| 199 | -4.05% |
| 200 | -4.07% |
| 201 | -4.09% |
| 202 | -4.11% |
| 203 | -4.13% |
| … | … |
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.