G'day, 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
83.49%
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 | 39 days | 100% |
| Caren | 6/10 | 192 days | 84% |
| Rosalie Begon | 9/10 | 220 days | 96% |
| Daniela Marx-Berger | 8/10 | 220 days | 95% |
| Laura | 8/10 | 282 days | 94% |
| Niek Olijve | 9/10 | 312 days | 94% |
| Emily | 8/10 | 526 days | 83% |
| Dylan and Amanda | 10/10 | 526 days | 84% |
| Shaun | 9/10 | 585 days | 80% |
| Laura | 7/10 | 585 days | 75% |
| Pauline | 7/10 | 922 days | 48% |
| Christopher Parker | 8/10 | 922 days | 50% |
| Joel Fryett | 10/10 | 982 days | 46% |
| Charlie | 8/10 | 1227 days | 25% |
| Courtney Gearhart | 8/10 | 1316 days | 19% |
| Alice | 9/10 | 1712 days | 6% |
| Jabba | 5/10 | 2077 days | 3% |
| ZMad | 7/10 | 2138 days | 4% |
| Ying | 9/10 | 2199 days | 4% |
| Samantha Macfarlane | 10/10 | 2230 days | 4% |
| Marg Dale | 7/10 | 2261 days | 4% |
| Kay | 7/10 | 2291 days | 4% |
| Charlie B | 5/10 | 2412 days | 3% |
| Pateke | 8/10 | 2443 days | 4% |
| Lisa Q | 9/10 | 2443 days | 4% |
| Nicole Blumenthal | 9/10 | 2504 days | 4% |
| Jenny | 7/10 | 2504 days | 3% |
| Olivia | 7/10 | 2504 days | 3% |
| Kristyl | 8/10 | 2688 days | 3% |
| Paul Smith | 8/10 | 2777 days | 3% |
| Shane | 7/10 | 2839 days | 3% |
| Sophie Skinner | 9/10 | 2869 days | 3% |
| Ryan | 9/10 | 2992 days | 3% |
| Rod Cochrane | 9/10 | 3083 days | 2% |
| Blu Ice | 7/10 | 3222 days | 2% |
| Fifi and Jay | 9/10 | 3392 days | 2% |
| Matt | 9/10 | 3418 days | 2% |
| Freddy Gates | 1/10 | 3455 days | 1% |
| Ayvadian Joséphine | 9/10 | 3554 days | 2% |
| Jane Knowles | 2/10 | 3630 days | 1% |
| Jessica Stokes | 7/10 | 3713 days | 1% |
| Jitka Kubeckova | 10/10 | 3904 days | 1% |
| Wout van Dijk | 7/10 | 3941 days | 1% |
| Helen Ameis | 7/10 | 4152 days | 0% |
| Harriet MacMillan | 6/10 | 4226 days | 0% |
| Melvin Spear | 8/10 | 4229 days | 0% |
| neil holdaway | 9/10 | 4269 days | 0% |
| Hol. M. | 9/10 | 4300 days | 0% |
| Jack Clise | 5/10 | 4313 days | 0% |
| Rosie | 8/10 | 4575 days | 1% |
| Jenny | 8/10 | 4596 days | 1% |
| Rachael | 7/10 | 4596 days | 1% |
| balesdent | 7/10 | 4631 days | 1% |
| Lior Bakski | 9/10 | 4632 days | 1% |
| jonas meier | 6/10 | 4639 days | 1% |
| Paul Balfour | 7/10 | 4644 days | 1% |
| Jade Fleming | 9/10 | 4695 days | 1% |
| hendrik king | 9/10 | 4848 days | 1% |
| SHERRYN WRIGHT | 3/10 | 4879 days | 0% |
| Thomas | 9/10 | 4938 days | 1% |
| Florian Aude | 7/10 | 4952 days | 1% |
| Philip Gibbons | 5/10 | 4968 days | 1% |
| Doug Digstravel | 9/10 | 4999 days | 1% |
| Rob | 8/10 | 5016 days | 1% |
| Jan Sjoerdtje | 7/10 | 5021 days | 1% |
| Doan | 8/10 | 5035 days | 1% |
| Erik Funk | 7/10 | 5037 days | 1% |
| phudgb | 7/10 | 5091 days | 1% |
| Jen Sweeting | 8/10 | 5292 days | 1% |
| Trevor & Sheila Redman | 8/10 | 5310 days | 1% |
| Jolene & James | 9/10 | 5315 days | 1% |
| Hannah Bean | 8/10 | 5316 days | 1% |
| John & Ray Calder | 8/10 | 5317 days | 1% |
| Tim & Judith | 8/10 | 5317 days | 1% |
| Karin | 7/10 | 5317 days | 1% |
| Frans | 7/10 | 5317 days | 1% |
| David Beaumont | 7/10 | 5317 days | 1% |
| Sebastian Rossbach | 8/10 | 5317 days | 1% |
| Ken | 10/10 | 5318 days | 1% |
| Judith Fowler | 9/10 | 5320 days | 1% |
| Marilyn Mobley | 9/10 | 5320 days | 1% |
| Schertenleib | 7/10 | 5321 days | 1% |
| Norm Cooper | 8/10 | 5326 days | 1% |
| Horst Langstein | 9/10 | 5327 days | 1% |
| Lucie Rutherfurd | 8/10 | 5332 days | 1% |
| Laura Smith | 9/10 | 5347 days | 1% |
| frans | 8/10 | 5579 days | 1% |
| Jorren | 8/10 | 5649 days | 1% |
| Jagiellowicz | 10/10 | 5657 days | 1% |
| Cory Wornell | 8/10 | 5660 days | 1% |
| Shane Curline | 9/10 | 5661 days | 1% |
| Anita Tonks | 9/10 | 5670 days | 1% |
| katjarege | 8/10 | 5671 days | 1% |
| Camilla Andersson | 8/10 | 5676 days | 1% |
| Peter | 5/10 | 5676 days | 1% |
| Mr and Mrs Lambert | 9/10 | 5678 days | 1% |
| Remke | 8/10 | 5700 days | 1% |
| dollimyxture | 9/10 | 5761 days | 1% |
| Jon van Hanten | 7/10 | 5961 days | 1% |
| Kevin & Chris | 8/10 | 5969 days | 1% |
| John Casey | 3/10 | 6017 days | 0% |
| Sorcha O's | 2/10 | 6017 days | 0% |
| Russell & Barbara Gilmour | 9/10 | 6022 days | 1% |
| kerry_cynthia | 8/10 | 6024 days | 1% |
| Lloyd Shephard | 9/10 | 6026 days | 1% |
| Mike Peirce | 8/10 | 6030 days | 1% |
| Rik | 9/10 | 6037 days | 1% |
| Jonathan Martin | 5/10 | 6039 days | 1% |
| Richard | 9/10 | 6040 days | 1% |
| Haas Wacter | 9/10 | 6044 days | 1% |
| Ferth | 9/10 | 6050 days | 1% |
| Marco | 8/10 | 6052 days | 1% |
| Eva | 9/10 | 6053 days | 1% |
| Don and Barb | 9/10 | 6057 days | 1% |
| Wilfred Sch | 7/10 | 6057 days | 1% |
| Susan | 10/10 | 6060 days | 1% |
| Adriane | 7/10 | 6060 days | 1% |
| Brenda | 8/10 | 6061 days | 1% |
| Bo Moenstead | 9/10 | 6073 days | 1% |
| Lynette Sal | 6/10 | 6080 days | 1% |
| menzel | 8/10 | 6109 days | 1% |
| stephenst | 9/10 | 6110 days | 1% |
| Marons | 7/10 | 6115 days | 1% |
| thomash | 10/10 | 6120 days | 1% |
| Anna | 4/10 | 6134 days | 1% |
| Flavia Mionelli | 10/10 | 6138 days | 1% |
| Nigel Petrie | 9/10 | 6149 days | 1% |
| eowyn2k | 8/10 | 6156 days | 1% |
| CAD1977 | 5/10 | 6217 days | 1% |
| rita | 9/10 | 6235 days | 1% |
| PeterK1 | 8/10 | 6354 days | 1% |
| MiepS | 8/10 | 6358 days | 1% |
| desl | 7/10 | 6370 days | 1% |
| GeraldMcNamora | 9/10 | 6386 days | 1% |
| Sarah_rae | 9/10 | 6386 days | 1% |
| Anna Hansson | 10/10 | 6387 days | 1% |
| Anna Hansson | 10/10 | 6387 days | 1% |
| Sara Hansson | 8/10 | 6387 days | 1% |
| TessaW | 8/10 | 6388 days | 1% |
| Jen | 8/10 | 6413 days | 1% |
| Sam | 9/10 | 6413 days | 1% |
| Tim | 10/10 | 6414 days | 1% |
| John | 10/10 | 6419 days | 1% |
| Phil&Joe | 10/10 | 6490 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
-0.15% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 85 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 11 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 8 | -0.11% |
| 9 | -0.13% |
| 10 | -0.14% |
| 11 | -0.15% |
| 12 | -0.17% |
| 13 | -0.18% |
| 14 | -0.19% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
2.17% 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
86%
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.