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 Riverside 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's avatar

Nick Morrison

Rankers owner

Riverside Holiday Park

Valid Reviews

98 Valid Reviews

The Riverside Holiday Park experience has a total of 102 reviews. There are 98 valid reviews that are included when calculating the ranking score and 4 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 98 valid reviews:

Rating Count Percentage
10/10 43
44%
9/10 20
20%
8/10 13
13%
7/10 8
8%
6/10 4
4%
5/10 6
6%
4/10 0
0%
3/10 1
1%
2/10 0
0%
1/10 3
3%

84.69% Average

The raw data average (mean) for all the Riverside Holiday Park valid reviews is 84.69% and is based on 98 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

20 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 98 valid reviews, the experience has 20 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.

Below is the distribution of ratings for the 20 face-to-face reviews:

Rating Count Percentage
10/10 2
10%
9/10 0
0%
8/10 6
30%
7/10 3
15%
6/10 3
15%
5/10 3
15%
4/10 0
0%
3/10 1
5%
2/10 0
0%
1/10 2
10%

63.50% Average

The raw data average (mean) for all the Riverside Holiday Park face-to-face reviews is 63.50% and is based on 20 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.

Weighted Average

91.87%

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
Josh & Eleanor 9/10 44 days 99.69 100%
Phil Bennett 9/10 74 days 99.13 99%
Phil 9/10 74 days 99.13 99%
Shelbi Kelly 10/10 74 days 99.13 99%
Gaudenz Schnell 10/10 258 days 89.45 90%
Marie van Tol 9/10 286 days 87.04 87%
Beth 10/10 286 days 87.04 87%
Jeremy 9/10 317 days 84.08 84%
Jacqui 10/10 348 days 80.81 81%
Marco 9/10 378 days 77.36 78%
Ryan 10/10 409 days 73.49 74%
Grizzly Girl 10/10 409 days 73.49 74%
Lance 10/10 409 days 73.49 74%
Daphne H 9/10 439 days 69.46 70%
Cassie 9/10 439 days 69.46 70%
Esther 8/10 531 days 52.55 53%
Clovis C. 10/10 592 days 45.09 45%
Tom J. 9/10 623 days 40.3 40%
Anke 9/10 623 days 40.3 40%
S Weslake 9/10 623 days 40.3 40%
Tom Meulders 5/10 695 days 24.59 25%
Joe Trigg 5/10 745 days 19.77 20%
Gary Prescot 8/10 776 days 20.07 20%
Peter Suan 10/10 889 days 11.72 12%
Lotta Vuorjoki 10/10 920 days 9.85 10%
Janet Pentelow 7/10 949 days 7.62 8%
Julia Kurtz 8/10 958 days 7.58 8%
Tracey Leyston 10/10 998 days 6.49 7%
Kati Behrendt 9/10 1006 days 6.26 6%
Tombeadle 10/10 1016 days 5.99 6%
Peter Armstrong 6/10 1016 days 4.97 5%
Erich Brueggermann 7/10 1045 days 4.91 5%
Rebecca Lindsey 7/10 1047 days 4.88 5%
Robert Hunt 8/10 1088 days 4.76 5%
Sheryl Hicks 8/10 1110 days 4.72 5%
Ivan Wee 10/10 1114 days 4.96 5%
Daphne H 9/10 1162 days 4.87 5%
Daniel Gold 10/10 1261 days 4.68 5%
william Sinclair 10/10 1261 days 4.68 5%
samuele cason 10/10 1292 days 4.61 5%
Wayne Jeskie 9/10 1302 days 4.59 5%
Ray Tombs 10/10 1312 days 4.58 5%
Julian Minnis 10/10 1313 days 4.57 5%
Jean Evans 10/10 1353 days 4.5 5%
Richard Thorpe 7/10 1357 days 4.08 4%
Philippa and Adam 9/10 1368 days 4.47 4%
Mike Awater 10/10 1370 days 4.46 4%
Julia Rey 10/10 1378 days 4.45 4%
Henry Gann 10/10 1380 days 4.44 4%
Jenn 10/10 1410 days 4.38 4%
Brian Gray 10/10 1413 days 4.38 4%
Meta bobnar 9/10 1503 days 4.2 4%
Kirsty Longland 10/10 1536 days 4.14 4%
Wolfgang Rank 10/10 1687 days 3.84 4%
Stephanie Poppe 7/10 1693 days 3.49 3%
Esther Itier 8/10 1713 days true 3.6 4%
Thomas Neron 8/10 1713 days true 3.6 4%
Jaron Frost 10/10 1719 days 3.78 4%
Pete Arney 9/10 1719 days 3.78 4%
Averil Brown 9/10 1744 days 3.73 4%
Janie James 10/10 1778 days 3.66 4%
Enrico Anna 10/10 1778 days 3.66 4%
mark radford 10/10 1778 days 3.66 4%
Bjorn Privat 10/10 1786 days 3.65 4%
Ingrid Harder 10/10 1809 days 3.6 4%
Joanne Robertson 8/10 1816 days true 3.41 3%
johno Tunnell 9/10 1839 days 3.54 4%
Karen Boot 8/10 1839 days 3.37 3%
Emma Barr 10/10 1839 days 3.54 4%
Nicola Whelan Henderson 10/10 1839 days 3.54 4%
Ellen McKee 10/10 1839 days 3.54 4%
Scott kearney 10/10 1839 days 3.54 4%
Lucas MacDonald 10/10 1839 days 3.54 4%
Hartwig Crailsheim 10/10 1839 days 3.54 4%
kim haward 10/10 1931 days 3.36 3%
Alan Williams 10/10 2053 days 3.13 3%
Thomas Hölscher 10/10 2053 days 3.13 3%
Thomas Walsh 9/10 2084 days 3.06 3%
Steve Fraser 5/10 2112 days 2.44 2%
Lee D 1/10 2327 days 1.89 2%
Alex Laidlaw 5/10 2546 days true 1.75 2%
Sander Heike 8/10 2786 days true 1.61 2%
Monika Kneidl 7/10 2789 days true 1.53 2%
Lorna Williams 7/10 2809 days true 1.5 2%
Hilbert vanEssen 3/10 2811 days true 1.26 1%
Ed & Katie Riches 6/10 2826 days true 1.34 1%
Preben vil Helmsen 6/10 2826 days true 1.34 1%
Thomas & Ruth Hardmeier 1/10 2831 days true 1.17 1%
Kurt & Noemi Buhler 1/10 2838 days true 1.16 1%
Des & Ann Bidwell 6/10 2838 days true 1.32 1%
Dugald McCallum 5/10 2842 days true 1.28 1%
James McColl 10/10 2935 days true 1.4 1%
Powerfamily 8/10 3058 days 1.1 1%
Jaime Ress 8/10 3160 days true 0.91 1%
Cory Wornell 10/10 3169 days true 0.94 1%
Thelia Beament 8/10 3183 days true 0.87 1%
Tim Wright 7/10 3206 days true 0.79 1%
SonjaG 5/10 3896 days true 0.0 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 Riverside Holiday Park experience has plenty of reviews and does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.

Recent Reviews Adjustment

-0.50% Adjustment

There may be an adjustment if an experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 60 days. However the Riverside 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 199 days.

The Riverside Holiday Park experience has been adjusted for 25 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.

Days Adjustment
22 -0.44%
23 -0.46%
24 -0.48%
25 -0.50%
26 -0.52%
27 -0.54%
28 -0.56%

Final Ranking Score

91%

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.