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 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
83.50%
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 | 61 days | 100% |
| Caren | 6/10 | 214 days | 84% |
| Rosalie Begon | 9/10 | 242 days | 96% |
| Daniela Marx-Berger | 8/10 | 242 days | 95% |
| Laura | 8/10 | 304 days | 93% |
| Niek Olijve | 9/10 | 334 days | 93% |
| Emily | 8/10 | 548 days | 81% |
| Dylan and Amanda | 10/10 | 548 days | 83% |
| Shaun | 9/10 | 607 days | 78% |
| Laura | 7/10 | 607 days | 74% |
| Pauline | 7/10 | 944 days | 46% |
| Christopher Parker | 8/10 | 944 days | 48% |
| Joel Fryett | 10/10 | 1004 days | 44% |
| Charlie | 8/10 | 1249 days | 23% |
| Courtney Gearhart | 8/10 | 1338 days | 18% |
| Alice | 9/10 | 1734 days | 5% |
| Jabba | 5/10 | 2099 days | 3% |
| ZMad | 7/10 | 2160 days | 4% |
| Ying | 9/10 | 2221 days | 4% |
| Samantha Macfarlane | 10/10 | 2252 days | 4% |
| Marg Dale | 7/10 | 2282 days | 4% |
| Kay | 7/10 | 2313 days | 4% |
| Charlie B | 5/10 | 2434 days | 3% |
| Pateke | 8/10 | 2465 days | 4% |
| Lisa Q | 9/10 | 2465 days | 4% |
| Nicole Blumenthal | 9/10 | 2525 days | 4% |
| Jenny | 7/10 | 2526 days | 3% |
| Olivia | 7/10 | 2526 days | 3% |
| Kristyl | 8/10 | 2710 days | 3% |
| Paul Smith | 8/10 | 2799 days | 3% |
| Shane | 7/10 | 2861 days | 3% |
| Sophie Skinner | 9/10 | 2891 days | 3% |
| Ryan | 9/10 | 3014 days | 3% |
| Rod Cochrane | 9/10 | 3105 days | 2% |
| Blu Ice | 7/10 | 3244 days | 2% |
| Fifi and Jay | 9/10 | 3414 days | 2% |
| Matt | 9/10 | 3439 days | 2% |
| Freddy Gates | 1/10 | 3477 days | 1% |
| Ayvadian Joséphine | 9/10 | 3576 days | 1% |
| Jane Knowles | 2/10 | 3651 days | 1% |
| Jessica Stokes | 7/10 | 3735 days | 1% |
| Jitka Kubeckova | 10/10 | 3925 days | 1% |
| Wout van Dijk | 7/10 | 3963 days | 1% |
| Helen Ameis | 7/10 | 4174 days | 0% |
| Harriet MacMillan | 6/10 | 4248 days | 0% |
| Melvin Spear | 8/10 | 4251 days | 0% |
| neil holdaway | 9/10 | 4290 days | 0% |
| Hol. M. | 9/10 | 4321 days | 0% |
| Jack Clise | 5/10 | 4335 days | 0% |
| Rosie | 8/10 | 4597 days | 1% |
| Jenny | 8/10 | 4618 days | 1% |
| Rachael | 7/10 | 4618 days | 1% |
| balesdent | 7/10 | 4653 days | 1% |
| Lior Bakski | 9/10 | 4654 days | 1% |
| jonas meier | 6/10 | 4661 days | 1% |
| Paul Balfour | 7/10 | 4666 days | 1% |
| Jade Fleming | 9/10 | 4717 days | 1% |
| hendrik king | 9/10 | 4870 days | 1% |
| SHERRYN WRIGHT | 3/10 | 4901 days | 0% |
| Thomas | 9/10 | 4960 days | 1% |
| Florian Aude | 7/10 | 4974 days | 1% |
| Philip Gibbons | 5/10 | 4990 days | 1% |
| Doug Digstravel | 9/10 | 5021 days | 1% |
| Rob | 8/10 | 5038 days | 1% |
| Jan Sjoerdtje | 7/10 | 5043 days | 1% |
| Doan | 8/10 | 5057 days | 1% |
| Erik Funk | 7/10 | 5059 days | 1% |
| phudgb | 7/10 | 5113 days | 1% |
| Jen Sweeting | 8/10 | 5314 days | 1% |
| Trevor & Sheila Redman | 8/10 | 5332 days | 1% |
| Jolene & James | 9/10 | 5337 days | 1% |
| Hannah Bean | 8/10 | 5338 days | 1% |
| John & Ray Calder | 8/10 | 5339 days | 1% |
| Tim & Judith | 8/10 | 5339 days | 1% |
| Karin | 7/10 | 5339 days | 1% |
| Frans | 7/10 | 5339 days | 1% |
| David Beaumont | 7/10 | 5339 days | 1% |
| Sebastian Rossbach | 8/10 | 5339 days | 1% |
| Ken | 10/10 | 5340 days | 1% |
| Judith Fowler | 9/10 | 5342 days | 1% |
| Marilyn Mobley | 9/10 | 5342 days | 1% |
| Schertenleib | 7/10 | 5343 days | 1% |
| Norm Cooper | 8/10 | 5348 days | 1% |
| Horst Langstein | 9/10 | 5349 days | 1% |
| Lucie Rutherfurd | 8/10 | 5354 days | 1% |
| Laura Smith | 9/10 | 5369 days | 1% |
| frans | 8/10 | 5601 days | 1% |
| Jorren | 8/10 | 5671 days | 1% |
| Jagiellowicz | 10/10 | 5679 days | 1% |
| Cory Wornell | 8/10 | 5682 days | 1% |
| Shane Curline | 9/10 | 5683 days | 1% |
| Anita Tonks | 9/10 | 5692 days | 1% |
| katjarege | 8/10 | 5693 days | 1% |
| Camilla Andersson | 8/10 | 5698 days | 1% |
| Peter | 5/10 | 5698 days | 1% |
| Mr and Mrs Lambert | 9/10 | 5700 days | 1% |
| Remke | 8/10 | 5722 days | 1% |
| dollimyxture | 9/10 | 5783 days | 1% |
| Jon van Hanten | 7/10 | 5983 days | 1% |
| Kevin & Chris | 8/10 | 5991 days | 1% |
| John Casey | 3/10 | 6039 days | 0% |
| Sorcha O's | 2/10 | 6039 days | 0% |
| Russell & Barbara Gilmour | 9/10 | 6044 days | 1% |
| kerry_cynthia | 8/10 | 6046 days | 1% |
| Lloyd Shephard | 9/10 | 6048 days | 1% |
| Mike Peirce | 8/10 | 6052 days | 1% |
| Rik | 9/10 | 6059 days | 1% |
| Jonathan Martin | 5/10 | 6061 days | 1% |
| Richard | 9/10 | 6062 days | 1% |
| Haas Wacter | 9/10 | 6066 days | 1% |
| Ferth | 9/10 | 6072 days | 1% |
| Marco | 8/10 | 6074 days | 1% |
| Eva | 9/10 | 6075 days | 1% |
| Don and Barb | 9/10 | 6079 days | 1% |
| Wilfred Sch | 7/10 | 6079 days | 1% |
| Susan | 10/10 | 6082 days | 1% |
| Adriane | 7/10 | 6082 days | 1% |
| Brenda | 8/10 | 6083 days | 1% |
| Bo Moenstead | 9/10 | 6095 days | 1% |
| Lynette Sal | 6/10 | 6102 days | 1% |
| menzel | 8/10 | 6131 days | 1% |
| stephenst | 9/10 | 6132 days | 1% |
| Marons | 7/10 | 6137 days | 1% |
| thomash | 10/10 | 6142 days | 1% |
| Anna | 4/10 | 6156 days | 1% |
| Flavia Mionelli | 10/10 | 6160 days | 1% |
| Nigel Petrie | 9/10 | 6171 days | 1% |
| eowyn2k | 8/10 | 6178 days | 1% |
| CAD1977 | 5/10 | 6239 days | 1% |
| rita | 9/10 | 6257 days | 1% |
| PeterK1 | 8/10 | 6376 days | 1% |
| MiepS | 8/10 | 6380 days | 1% |
| desl | 7/10 | 6392 days | 1% |
| GeraldMcNamora | 9/10 | 6408 days | 1% |
| Sarah_rae | 9/10 | 6408 days | 1% |
| Anna Hansson | 10/10 | 6409 days | 1% |
| Anna Hansson | 10/10 | 6409 days | 1% |
| Sara Hansson | 8/10 | 6409 days | 1% |
| TessaW | 8/10 | 6410 days | 1% |
| Jen | 8/10 | 6435 days | 1% |
| Sam | 9/10 | 6435 days | 1% |
| Tim | 10/10 | 6436 days | 1% |
| John | 10/10 | 6441 days | 1% |
| Phil&Joe | 10/10 | 6512 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
-0.52% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 67 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 32 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 29 | -0.47% |
| 30 | -0.49% |
| 31 | -0.51% |
| 32 | -0.52% |
| 33 | -0.54% |
| 34 | -0.56% |
| 35 | -0.57% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
2.25% 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.