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 Rapahoe 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.
Rapahoe Beach Holiday Park
Valid Reviews
93 Valid Reviews
The Rapahoe Beach Holiday Park experience has a total of 95 reviews. There are 93 valid reviews that are included when calculating the ranking score and 2 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 93 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 39 |
|
42% |
| 9/10 | 22 |
|
24% |
| 8/10 | 14 |
|
15% |
| 7/10 | 8 |
|
9% |
| 6/10 | 4 |
|
4% |
| 5/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 4/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 3/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 3 |
|
3% |
85.48% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Rapahoe Beach Holiday Park valid reviews is 85.48% and is based on 93 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
22 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 93 valid reviews, the experience has 22 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 22 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 9/10 | 9 |
|
41% |
| 8/10 | 6 |
|
27% |
| 7/10 | 4 |
|
18% |
| 6/10 | 2 |
|
9% |
| 5/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 1 |
|
5% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
78.18% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Rapahoe Beach Holiday Park face-to-face reviews is 78.18% and is based on 22 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
94.97%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jorgelina | 10/10 | 34 days | 100% |
| EUNJI | 10/10 | 65 days | 100% |
| John Mitchell | 10/10 | 279 days | 96% |
| Andrew | 10/10 | 307 days | 95% |
| Doug | 10/10 | 307 days | 95% |
| Dora | 10/10 | 338 days | 94% |
| Bruce Ross | 10/10 | 338 days | 94% |
| Jojo&Skoko | 10/10 | 338 days | 94% |
| Franklin | 10/10 | 369 days | 92% |
| Annette McGrath | 7/10 | 399 days | 85% |
| TravelingVan | 10/10 | 430 days | 90% |
| Shenay | 10/10 | 460 days | 88% |
| Sheryl Watson | 9/10 | 613 days | 78% |
| Sally Gillespie | 10/10 | 644 days | 76% |
| Christopher Parker | 10/10 | 644 days | 76% |
| Mike C | 10/10 | 644 days | 76% |
| Ginny | 10/10 | 673 days | 74% |
| velvetmayhem | 9/10 | 704 days | 71% |
| Alex | 9/10 | 704 days | 71% |
| Heledd | 9/10 | 704 days | 71% |
| Tom | 10/10 | 704 days | 72% |
| Wendy | 8/10 | 735 days | 68% |
| Steve Collins | 8/10 | 735 days | 68% |
| Pauline | 10/10 | 735 days | 69% |
| George | 10/10 | 796 days | 64% |
| Chelsea | 10/10 | 796 days | 64% |
| Marie Perret | 9/10 | 796 days | 63% |
| Maria Fidler | 9/10 | 796 days | 63% |
| Mae | 10/10 | 949 days | 49% |
| Corrina Smith | 10/10 | 949 days | 49% |
| Riley | 10/10 | 1010 days | 43% |
| Kate Fairhall | 10/10 | 1038 days | 40% |
| Karen Gilchrist | 10/10 | 1038 days | 40% |
| Dannie | 7/10 | 1069 days | 35% |
| Matt | 8/10 | 1069 days | 37% |
| Jamieson Kohe | 10/10 | 1100 days | 35% |
| K Arnold | 1/10 | 1222 days | 10% |
| Emma | 9/10 | 1740 days | 5% |
| Amber | 9/10 | 1768 days | 5% |
| Jay W | 8/10 | 1952 days | 5% |
| Lena L. | 10/10 | 2105 days | 4% |
| Hannah | 10/10 | 2165 days | 4% |
| Georgie | 10/10 | 2440 days | 4% |
| Mirandah | 8/10 | 2471 days | 4% |
| Sebastian | 10/10 | 2530 days | 4% |
| Moritz | 10/10 | 2561 days | 4% |
| Philip Page | 8/10 | 2652 days | 3% |
| Sandra Day | 1/10 | 2836 days | 1% |
| Wolfgang Sulzer | 5/10 | 3146 days | 2% |
| Andrea Aschenbrenner | 10/10 | 3161 days | 2% |
| Kathy Miller | 9/10 | 3188 days | 2% |
| Johanna Dorner | 9/10 | 3215 days | 2% |
| Annalena Harmeyer | 10/10 | 3225 days | 2% |
| Z H | 1/10 | 3228 days | 1% |
| Rebecca Lindsey | 10/10 | 3259 days | 2% |
| Tracy Ivory | 4/10 | 3290 days | 1% |
| Greg MacFire | 10/10 | 3297 days | 2% |
| Ivan Wee | 8/10 | 3325 days | 2% |
| Ulrich Rix | 8/10 | 3565 days | 2% |
| Ives van Neck | 7/10 | 3588 days | 1% |
| Bianca Nielsen | 10/10 | 3594 days | 2% |
| Philippa and Adam | 6/10 | 3598 days | 1% |
| Manu Hume | 9/10 | 3603 days | 1% |
| Singapore Sling | 6/10 | 3656 days | 1% |
| Tom H | 10/10 | 3931 days | 1% |
| Nicki Rehn | 10/10 | 3948 days | 1% |
| Tim Porter | 9/10 | 3992 days | 1% |
| Helene Andersen | 9/10 | 4292 days | 0% |
| Douglas Dean | 9/10 | 4297 days | 0% |
| Antton Vappula | 9/10 | 4315 days | 0% |
| Michael Turek | 9/10 | 4325 days | 0% |
| Tanje Norton | 10/10 | 4325 days | 0% |
| Sugar Price | 7/10 | 4325 days | 0% |
| Florian Carli | 9/10 | 4356 days | 0% |
| Orla Hughes | 9/10 | 4365 days | 0% |
| Abby Rescr | 7/10 | 4662 days | 1% |
| Frederick Dean | 9/10 | 4662 days | 1% |
| Helen Dean | 9/10 | 4662 days | 1% |
| Joey Mertzig | 9/10 | 4679 days | 1% |
| Henry Howard | 10/10 | 4721 days | 1% |
| Jaap & Susanne | 7/10 | 5036 days | 1% |
| Cindy & Glen Kerunsky | 9/10 | 5043 days | 1% |
| Heini | 8/10 | 5055 days | 1% |
| Fran Williams | 8/10 | 5373 days | 1% |
| Winskowsky | 3/10 | 5395 days | 0% |
| Kuno Eugster | 7/10 | 5401 days | 1% |
| Marleen Meyers | 8/10 | 5404 days | 1% |
| Bob Warne | 7/10 | 5404 days | 1% |
| Irene and Thib Schneider | 6/10 | 5409 days | 1% |
| Patrick Hugener | 8/10 | 5417 days | 1% |
| mikestep | 8/10 | 6092 days | 1% |
| davidne | 8/10 | 6092 days | 1% |
| David_H | 6/10 | 6151 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 Rapahoe Beach Holiday Park experience has plenty of reviews and does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
Recent Reviews Adjustment
-0.55% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 42 days. However the Rapahoe 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 Rapahoe Beach Holiday Park experience has been adjusted for 27 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 24 | -0.49% |
| 25 | -0.51% |
| 26 | -0.53% |
| 27 | -0.55% |
| 28 | -0.57% |
| 29 | -0.59% |
| 30 | -0.61% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
0.49% 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
95%
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.