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 Tahuna Beach 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.
Tahuna Beach Holiday Park
Valid Reviews
144 Valid Reviews
The Tahuna Beach Holiday Park experience has a total of 149 reviews. There are 144 valid reviews that are included when calculating the ranking score and 5 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 144 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 15 |
|
10% |
| 9/10 | 44 |
|
31% |
| 8/10 | 40 |
|
28% |
| 7/10 | 28 |
|
19% |
| 6/10 | 4 |
|
3% |
| 5/10 | 7 |
|
5% |
| 4/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 3/10 | 2 |
|
1% |
| 2/10 | 2 |
|
1% |
| 1/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
78.89% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Tahuna Beach Holiday Park valid reviews is 78.89% and is based on 144 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
85 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 144 valid reviews, the experience has 85 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 85 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 10 |
|
12% |
| 9/10 | 25 |
|
29% |
| 8/10 | 28 |
|
33% |
| 7/10 | 15 |
|
18% |
| 6/10 | 2 |
|
2% |
| 5/10 | 2 |
|
2% |
| 4/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 3/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 2/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
80.59% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Tahuna Beach Holiday Park face-to-face reviews is 80.59% and is based on 85 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
83.51%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Birgit Nicolaucig | 10/10 | 66 days | 100% |
| Caren | 6/10 | 220 days | 84% |
| Rosalie Begon | 9/10 | 248 days | 96% |
| Daniela Marx-Berger | 8/10 | 248 days | 95% |
| Laura | 8/10 | 310 days | 93% |
| Niek Olijve | 9/10 | 340 days | 93% |
| Emily | 8/10 | 554 days | 81% |
| Dylan and Amanda | 10/10 | 554 days | 83% |
| Shaun | 9/10 | 613 days | 78% |
| Laura | 7/10 | 613 days | 73% |
| Pauline | 7/10 | 950 days | 45% |
| Christopher Parker | 8/10 | 950 days | 48% |
| Joel Fryett | 10/10 | 1010 days | 43% |
| Charlie | 8/10 | 1254 days | 23% |
| Courtney Gearhart | 8/10 | 1344 days | 18% |
| Alice | 9/10 | 1740 days | 5% |
| Jabba | 5/10 | 2105 days | 3% |
| ZMad | 7/10 | 2166 days | 4% |
| Ying | 9/10 | 2226 days | 4% |
| Samantha Macfarlane | 10/10 | 2257 days | 4% |
| Marg Dale | 7/10 | 2288 days | 4% |
| Kay | 7/10 | 2318 days | 4% |
| Charlie B | 5/10 | 2440 days | 3% |
| Pateke | 8/10 | 2471 days | 4% |
| Lisa Q | 9/10 | 2471 days | 4% |
| Nicole Blumenthal | 9/10 | 2531 days | 4% |
| Jenny | 7/10 | 2532 days | 3% |
| Olivia | 7/10 | 2532 days | 3% |
| Kristyl | 8/10 | 2715 days | 3% |
| Paul Smith | 8/10 | 2805 days | 3% |
| Shane | 7/10 | 2867 days | 3% |
| Sophie Skinner | 9/10 | 2897 days | 3% |
| Ryan | 9/10 | 3019 days | 3% |
| Rod Cochrane | 9/10 | 3111 days | 2% |
| Blu Ice | 7/10 | 3250 days | 2% |
| Fifi and Jay | 9/10 | 3419 days | 2% |
| Matt | 9/10 | 3445 days | 2% |
| Freddy Gates | 1/10 | 3483 days | 1% |
| Ayvadian Joséphine | 9/10 | 3582 days | 1% |
| Jane Knowles | 2/10 | 3657 days | 1% |
| Jessica Stokes | 7/10 | 3740 days | 1% |
| Jitka Kubeckova | 10/10 | 3931 days | 1% |
| Wout van Dijk | 7/10 | 3969 days | 1% |
| Helen Ameis | 7/10 | 4179 days | 0% |
| Harriet MacMillan | 6/10 | 4254 days | 0% |
| Melvin Spear | 8/10 | 4257 days | 0% |
| neil holdaway | 9/10 | 4296 days | 0% |
| Hol. M. | 9/10 | 4327 days | 0% |
| Jack Clise | 5/10 | 4341 days | 0% |
| Rosie | 8/10 | 4603 days | 1% |
| Jenny | 8/10 | 4624 days | 1% |
| Rachael | 7/10 | 4624 days | 1% |
| balesdent | 7/10 | 4659 days | 1% |
| Lior Bakski | 9/10 | 4660 days | 1% |
| jonas meier | 6/10 | 4667 days | 1% |
| Paul Balfour | 7/10 | 4672 days | 1% |
| Jade Fleming | 9/10 | 4723 days | 1% |
| hendrik king | 9/10 | 4875 days | 1% |
| SHERRYN WRIGHT | 3/10 | 4906 days | 0% |
| Thomas | 9/10 | 4966 days | 1% |
| Florian Aude | 7/10 | 4980 days | 1% |
| Philip Gibbons | 5/10 | 4996 days | 1% |
| Doug Digstravel | 9/10 | 5027 days | 1% |
| Rob | 8/10 | 5044 days | 1% |
| Jan Sjoerdtje | 7/10 | 5049 days | 1% |
| Doan | 8/10 | 5063 days | 1% |
| Erik Funk | 7/10 | 5065 days | 1% |
| phudgb | 7/10 | 5119 days | 1% |
| Jen Sweeting | 8/10 | 5320 days | 1% |
| Trevor & Sheila Redman | 8/10 | 5338 days | 1% |
| Jolene & James | 9/10 | 5343 days | 1% |
| Hannah Bean | 8/10 | 5344 days | 1% |
| John & Ray Calder | 8/10 | 5345 days | 1% |
| Tim & Judith | 8/10 | 5345 days | 1% |
| Karin | 7/10 | 5345 days | 1% |
| Frans | 7/10 | 5345 days | 1% |
| David Beaumont | 7/10 | 5345 days | 1% |
| Sebastian Rossbach | 8/10 | 5345 days | 1% |
| Ken | 10/10 | 5346 days | 1% |
| Judith Fowler | 9/10 | 5348 days | 1% |
| Marilyn Mobley | 9/10 | 5348 days | 1% |
| Schertenleib | 7/10 | 5349 days | 1% |
| Norm Cooper | 8/10 | 5354 days | 1% |
| Horst Langstein | 9/10 | 5355 days | 1% |
| Lucie Rutherfurd | 8/10 | 5360 days | 1% |
| Laura Smith | 9/10 | 5375 days | 1% |
| frans | 8/10 | 5606 days | 1% |
| Jorren | 8/10 | 5677 days | 1% |
| Jagiellowicz | 10/10 | 5685 days | 1% |
| Cory Wornell | 8/10 | 5688 days | 1% |
| Shane Curline | 9/10 | 5689 days | 1% |
| Anita Tonks | 9/10 | 5698 days | 1% |
| katjarege | 8/10 | 5699 days | 1% |
| Camilla Andersson | 8/10 | 5704 days | 1% |
| Peter | 5/10 | 5704 days | 1% |
| Mr and Mrs Lambert | 9/10 | 5706 days | 1% |
| Remke | 8/10 | 5728 days | 1% |
| dollimyxture | 9/10 | 5789 days | 1% |
| Jon van Hanten | 7/10 | 5988 days | 1% |
| Kevin & Chris | 8/10 | 5996 days | 1% |
| John Casey | 3/10 | 6045 days | 0% |
| Sorcha O's | 2/10 | 6045 days | 0% |
| Russell & Barbara Gilmour | 9/10 | 6050 days | 1% |
| kerry_cynthia | 8/10 | 6052 days | 1% |
| Lloyd Shephard | 9/10 | 6054 days | 1% |
| Mike Peirce | 8/10 | 6058 days | 1% |
| Rik | 9/10 | 6065 days | 1% |
| Jonathan Martin | 5/10 | 6067 days | 1% |
| Richard | 9/10 | 6068 days | 1% |
| Haas Wacter | 9/10 | 6072 days | 1% |
| Ferth | 9/10 | 6078 days | 1% |
| Marco | 8/10 | 6080 days | 1% |
| Eva | 9/10 | 6081 days | 1% |
| Don and Barb | 9/10 | 6085 days | 1% |
| Wilfred Sch | 7/10 | 6085 days | 1% |
| Susan | 10/10 | 6088 days | 1% |
| Adriane | 7/10 | 6088 days | 1% |
| Brenda | 8/10 | 6089 days | 1% |
| Bo Moenstead | 9/10 | 6101 days | 1% |
| Lynette Sal | 6/10 | 6108 days | 1% |
| menzel | 8/10 | 6137 days | 1% |
| stephenst | 9/10 | 6138 days | 1% |
| Marons | 7/10 | 6143 days | 1% |
| thomash | 10/10 | 6148 days | 1% |
| Anna | 4/10 | 6162 days | 1% |
| Flavia Mionelli | 10/10 | 6166 days | 1% |
| Nigel Petrie | 9/10 | 6177 days | 1% |
| eowyn2k | 8/10 | 6184 days | 1% |
| CAD1977 | 5/10 | 6244 days | 1% |
| rita | 9/10 | 6262 days | 1% |
| PeterK1 | 8/10 | 6381 days | 1% |
| MiepS | 8/10 | 6385 days | 1% |
| desl | 7/10 | 6398 days | 1% |
| GeraldMcNamora | 9/10 | 6414 days | 1% |
| Sarah_rae | 9/10 | 6414 days | 1% |
| Anna Hansson | 10/10 | 6415 days | 1% |
| Anna Hansson | 10/10 | 6415 days | 1% |
| Sara Hansson | 8/10 | 6415 days | 1% |
| TessaW | 8/10 | 6416 days | 1% |
| Jen | 8/10 | 6441 days | 1% |
| Sam | 9/10 | 6441 days | 1% |
| Tim | 10/10 | 6442 days | 1% |
| John | 10/10 | 6447 days | 1% |
| Phil&Joe | 10/10 | 6518 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 Tahuna Beach Holiday Park experience has plenty of reviews and does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
Recent Reviews Adjustment
-0.65% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 64 days. However the Tahuna Beach 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 Tahuna Beach Holiday Park experience has been adjusted for 38 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 35 | -0.60% |
| 36 | -0.61% |
| 37 | -0.63% |
| 38 | -0.65% |
| 39 | -0.66% |
| 40 | -0.68% |
| 41 | -0.70% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
2.27% 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
85%
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.