Ranking Score Explained
Hello 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 Fox Glacier TOP 10 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.
Fox Glacier TOP 10 Holiday Park
Valid Reviews
155 Valid Reviews
The Fox Glacier TOP 10 Holiday Park experience has a total of 158 reviews. There are 155 valid reviews that are included when calculating the ranking score and 3 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 155 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 47 |
|
30% |
| 9/10 | 50 |
|
32% |
| 8/10 | 26 |
|
17% |
| 7/10 | 19 |
|
12% |
| 6/10 | 3 |
|
2% |
| 5/10 | 2 |
|
1% |
| 4/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 3/10 | 3 |
|
2% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 4 |
|
3% |
84.26% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Fox Glacier TOP 10 Holiday Park valid reviews is 84.26% and is based on 155 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
70 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 155 valid reviews, the experience has 70 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 70 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 16 |
|
23% |
| 9/10 | 28 |
|
40% |
| 8/10 | 17 |
|
24% |
| 7/10 | 7 |
|
10% |
| 6/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 5/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
86.43% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Fox Glacier TOP 10 Holiday Park face-to-face reviews is 86.43% and is based on 70 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
91.11%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| AMR | 10/10 | 221 days | 100% |
| Tash and Liam | 10/10 | 527 days | 61% |
| Marn | 10/10 | 527 days | 61% |
| Ying | 9/10 | 647 days | 40% |
| Anna Swain | 9/10 | 800 days | 20% |
| Justin | 9/10 | 892 days | 12% |
| Ju | 9/10 | 921 days | 11% |
| Pateke | 10/10 | 952 days | 9% |
| Timothy Davies | 10/10 | 1013 days | 7% |
| Hclare | 10/10 | 1044 days | 6% |
| ScoutnIndi | 10/10 | 1166 days | 5% |
| Kate | 9/10 | 1197 days | 5% |
| Chelle | 10/10 | 1286 days | 5% |
| Dlg | 3/10 | 1317 days | 4% |
| Raphaele | 7/10 | 1348 days | 4% |
| Sunny | 9/10 | 1378 days | 5% |
| CJC | 10/10 | 1378 days | 5% |
| Angela | 9/10 | 1409 days | 5% |
| Daphne H | 9/10 | 1439 days | 5% |
| Pete | 10/10 | 1439 days | 5% |
| Mr&MrsGnu | 10/10 | 1562 days | 4% |
| WeiQiang Ng | 10/10 | 1562 days | 4% |
| Roth Nicks | 1/10 | 1562 days | 3% |
| BM | 6/10 | 1592 days | 4% |
| Michael McMahon | 10/10 | 1592 days | 4% |
| Graeme | 4/10 | 1592 days | 3% |
| wanchai anantikulchai | 5/10 | 1592 days | 3% |
| Will | 7/10 | 1623 days | 4% |
| Michael Stützle | 9/10 | 1623 days | 4% |
| Shira LA | 8/10 | 1651 days | 4% |
| Eversons | 6/10 | 1682 days | 3% |
| Audrey Wong | 10/10 | 1690 days | 4% |
| Katrina | 8/10 | 1712 days | 4% |
| Paul and Paula | 7/10 | 1718 days | 4% |
| Nadene Wheatley | 7/10 | 1739 days | 4% |
| Pam Rule | 10/10 | 1770 days | 4% |
| Jo Jardine | 10/10 | 1820 days | 4% |
| Laureen Trainer | 8/10 | 1911 days | 3% |
| Brett King | 8/10 | 1926 days | 3% |
| Belinda Clarke | 8/10 | 1961 days | 3% |
| P Stiller-Johnson | 10/10 | 1964 days | 4% |
| Kenny Werink | 1/10 | 1966 days | 3% |
| Sylvie Meganck | 6/10 | 1987 days | 3% |
| Jesse Kruithoed | 9/10 | 1997 days | 3% |
| Jude Ong | 10/10 | 2107 days | 3% |
| James Richmond | 3/10 | 2121 days | 2% |
| Mike Guest | 10/10 | 2127 days | 3% |
| Amy Yates | 9/10 | 2166 days | 3% |
| Shelley Hancox | 9/10 | 2216 days | 3% |
| Liz Cave | 10/10 | 2221 days | 3% |
| Jessica Stokes | 10/10 | 2222 days | 3% |
| Marene Fu | 10/10 | 2264 days | 3% |
| María del Carmen Escandell | 9/10 | 2285 days | 3% |
| Estelle Daniel | 10/10 | 2355 days | 3% |
| Staffan Johansson | 8/10 | 2364 days | 3% |
| Glinys Weller | 8/10 | 2399 days | 2% |
| Allyson Taylor | 7/10 | 2712 days | 2% |
| Alistair Millward | 9/10 | 2715 days | 2% |
| Nurlaily Abu Bakar | 7/10 | 2718 days | 2% |
| Andrew Cruickshank | 10/10 | 2718 days | 2% |
| Jess Rose | 9/10 | 2746 days | 2% |
| Silke | 7/10 | 2760 days | 2% |
| Syed Riyazuddin | 7/10 | 2838 days | 2% |
| Andrew Kermode | 10/10 | 2962 days | 1% |
| Fabian Rodriguez | 10/10 | 2992 days | 1% |
| Patricia Revel | 8/10 | 3054 days | 1% |
| Matt Weston | 7/10 | 3067 days | 1% |
| David Spindler | 7/10 | 3084 days | 1% |
| Daniel Robledo | 7/10 | 3085 days | 1% |
| Maria Camen Santos Lopez | 7/10 | 3085 days | 1% |
| Frank Jensen | 9/10 | 3099 days | 1% |
| Matusala Habtemariam | 9/10 | 3108 days | 1% |
| Joy Lambez | 10/10 | 3109 days | 1% |
| Michael Sheridan | 9/10 | 3124 days | 1% |
| Ariadna & Omer | 7/10 | 3174 days | 1% |
| andrewmh | 9/10 | 3174 days | 1% |
| Alex | 1/10 | 3327 days | 0% |
| Grantygrant | 7/10 | 3418 days | 0% |
| Raelene Vine | 8/10 | 3449 days | 0% |
| doepie277 | 7/10 | 3508 days | 0% |
| Hanneke P | 8/10 | 3508 days | 0% |
| Karin Genyn | 10/10 | 3525 days | 0% |
| Stephanie Levepue | 8/10 | 3543 days | 0% |
| Oliver Kalmbach | 3/10 | 3548 days | 0% |
| Nicholas I Allen | 10/10 | 3569 days | 0% |
| David | 10/10 | 3569 days | 0% |
| Cathyd07 | 10/10 | 3630 days | 0% |
| Tjw | 9/10 | 3692 days | 1% |
| sueadegizmo | 9/10 | 3722 days | 1% |
| Christina Bruellhardt | 10/10 | 3796 days | 1% |
| Andreas Schacke | 5/10 | 3799 days | 1% |
| M Robinson | 10/10 | 3810 days | 1% |
| Volker | 9/10 | 3823 days | 1% |
| Sabine & Stefan | 10/10 | 3827 days | 1% |
| Cindy & Glen Kerunsky | 9/10 | 3830 days | 1% |
| Horst Langstein | 8/10 | 3836 days | 1% |
| jeanolivier3 | 1/10 | 3843 days | 1% |
| CMJ | 9/10 | 3874 days | 1% |
| Ray Coombe | 10/10 | 3917 days | 1% |
| neilqecosse | 9/10 | 3935 days | 1% |
| qofd | 9/10 | 4119 days | 1% |
| Sean Brownell | 9/10 | 4149 days | 1% |
| Prideaux | 8/10 | 4159 days | 1% |
| Bryan & Ineke Beck | 10/10 | 4159 days | 1% |
| Chris Forrest | 9/10 | 4159 days | 1% |
| Hanggi | 10/10 | 4160 days | 1% |
| Ray Banham | 10/10 | 4160 days | 1% |
| Gronewold Harm-Dierchs | 9/10 | 4164 days | 1% |
| Coral Last | 7/10 | 4166 days | 1% |
| T Lipscombe | 9/10 | 4172 days | 1% |
| Tricia Goggin | 9/10 | 4172 days | 1% |
| Mannebach & Siejert | 8/10 | 4177 days | 1% |
| Caroline Sheridan | 10/10 | 4184 days | 1% |
| Mr & Mrs Mackie | 9/10 | 4190 days | 1% |
| Andy | 9/10 | 4195 days | 1% |
| Maite Severins | 8/10 | 4199 days | 1% |
| Derek Archibald | 8/10 | 4201 days | 1% |
| Leslie Aldridge | 7/10 | 4201 days | 1% |
| Ewald Waldner | 9/10 | 4204 days | 1% |
| Augelika Berugard | 7/10 | 4207 days | 1% |
| Versteeg | 9/10 | 4466 days | 1% |
| nuwee | 10/10 | 4514 days | 1% |
| Stephen M | 9/10 | 4526 days | 1% |
| s_butler | 10/10 | 4533 days | 1% |
| Hilary and Chris Ayton | 9/10 | 4533 days | 1% |
| Benedict Fluthman | 8/10 | 4535 days | 1% |
| Ingrid Zell | 9/10 | 4536 days | 1% |
| Westermann | 10/10 | 4536 days | 1% |
| Peter G | 8/10 | 4539 days | 1% |
| Ian Watson | 10/10 | 4546 days | 1% |
| Jackie | 8/10 | 4564 days | 1% |
| Schygulla | 9/10 | 4565 days | 1% |
| Lasse Olesen | 8/10 | 4566 days | 1% |
| Sinjc Grude | 8/10 | 4570 days | 1% |
| Frances Hay | 8/10 | 4572 days | 1% |
| Diane Chapple | 8/10 | 4572 days | 1% |
| Anne Fri | 10/10 | 4572 days | 1% |
| nigelst | 9/10 | 4579 days | 1% |
| Stephanie K | 8/10 | 4586 days | 1% |
| Jennifer Templeton | 8/10 | 4590 days | 1% |
| Susi Schoetzler | 9/10 | 4593 days | 1% |
| sophiep | 9/10 | 4619 days | 1% |
| simonbo | 9/10 | 4619 days | 1% |
| tanh | 9/10 | 4620 days | 1% |
| marijad | 10/10 | 4623 days | 1% |
| alasiac | 10/10 | 4635 days | 1% |
| Eimear Doyle | 8/10 | 4647 days | 1% |
| X Neils | 7/10 | 4657 days | 1% |
| hellami | 9/10 | 4665 days | 1% |
| SandyS | 10/10 | 4757 days | 1% |
| Andrea | 9/10 | 4799 days | 1% |
| SSheil | 9/10 | 4867 days | 1% |
| JohannaB | 9/10 | 4898 days | 1% |
| Dirk | 9/10 | 4922 days | 1% |
| Doll | 9/10 | 4926 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 Fox Glacier TOP 10 Holiday Park experience has plenty of reviews and does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
Recent Reviews Adjustment
-2.15% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 118 days. However the Fox Glacier TOP 10 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 Fox Glacier TOP 10 Holiday Park experience has been adjusted for 194 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 191 | -2.12% |
| 192 | -2.13% |
| 193 | -2.14% |
| 194 | -2.15% |
| 195 | -2.16% |
| 196 | -2.17% |
| 197 | -2.18% |
| … | … |
Final Ranking Score
89%
The final ranking score once any adjustments, ratings, 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.