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
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 |  |
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 | |
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 | |
5.29 | 4% |
| Manuela | 10/10 | 1540 days | |
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 | |
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 | |
4.85 | 3% |
| Josefin Lind | 9/10 | 1798 days | |
4.84 | 3% |
| Herman Holmgist | 9/10 | 1798 days | |
4.84 | 3% |
| Leeann Newton | 9/10 | 1845 days | |
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 | |
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 | |
4.08 | 2% |
| Johannes OBerlin | 10/10 | 2546 days | |
3.61 | 2% |
| Shavill | 10/10 | 2549 days | 3.01 | 1% | |
| Michael Stoll | 10/10 | 2559 days | |
3.59 | 2% |
| E Smudde | 8/10 | 2562 days | |
3.59 | 2% |
| RhysWendy | 10/10 | 2609 days | 2.93 | 1% | |
| Ken Jones | 9/10 | 2890 days | |
3.05 | 1% |
| Steve Waterhouse | 8/10 | 2900 days | |
3.03 | 1% |
| Jan Visser | 8/10 | 2915 days | |
3.01 | 1% |
| Victoria Purver | 10/10 | 2918 days | |
3.0 | 1% |
| Andrew Koster | 9/10 | 2928 days | |
2.99 | 1% |
| Emma Edis-Bates | 9/10 | 2931 days | |
2.98 | 1% |
| rhubarbsky | 10/10 | 3005 days | 2.38 | 1% | |
| krisevelyn | 9/10 | 3219 days | |
2.51 | 1% |
| Caitriona Doyle | 10/10 | 3302 days | |
2.37 | 1% |
| Hanz | 10/10 | 3304 days | |
2.37 | 1% |
| Linley Faulkner | 10/10 | 3308 days | 1.97 | 0% | |
| EA Anders | 10/10 | 3325 days | |
2.33 | 1% |
| Family van Hessem | 8/10 | 3328 days | |
2.33 | 1% |
| Anna | 10/10 | 3378 days | |
2.25 | 0% |
| Jessica Clarisse | 10/10 | 3382 days | |
2.24 | 0% |
| Christine Suess | 10/10 | 3382 days | |
2.24 | 0% |
| LindaV | 8/10 | 3648 days | |
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.