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 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
151 Valid Reviews
The Fox Glacier TOP 10 Holiday Park experience has a total of 154 reviews. There are 151 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 151 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 44 |
|
29% |
| 9/10 | 49 |
|
32% |
| 8/10 | 26 |
|
17% |
| 7/10 | 19 |
|
13% |
| 6/10 | 3 |
|
2% |
| 5/10 | 2 |
|
1% |
| 4/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 3/10 | 3 |
|
2% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 4 |
|
3% |
83.91% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Fox Glacier TOP 10 Holiday Park valid reviews is 83.91% and is based on 151 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 151 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
89.12%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Anna Swain | 9/10 | 152 days | 96.34 | 100% | |
| Justin | 9/10 | 245 days | 90.49 | 94% | |
| Ju | 9/10 | 274 days | 88.1 | 91% | |
| Pateke | 10/10 | 305 days | 85.26 | 88% | |
| Timothy Davies | 10/10 | 366 days | 78.77 | 82% | |
| Hclare | 10/10 | 397 days | 75.02 | 78% | |
| ScoutnIndi | 10/10 | 518 days | 57.48 | 60% | |
| Kate | 9/10 | 549 days | 52.24 | 54% | |
| Chelle | 10/10 | 639 days | 37.95 | 39% | |
| Dlg | 3/10 | 670 days | 25.89 | 27% | |
| Raphaele | 7/10 | 701 days | 26.94 | 28% | |
| Sunny | 9/10 | 731 days | 26.0 | 27% | |
| CJC | 10/10 | 731 days | 26.0 | 27% | |
| Angela | 9/10 | 762 days | 22.57 | 23% | |
| Daphne H | 9/10 | 791 days | 19.64 | 20% | |
| Pete | 10/10 | 791 days | 19.64 | 20% | |
| Mr&MrsGnu | 10/10 | 914 days | 10.19 | 11% | |
| WeiQiang Ng | 10/10 | 914 days | 10.19 | 11% | |
| Roth Nicks | 1/10 | 914 days | 7.44 | 8% | |
| BM | 6/10 | 945 days | 7.11 | 7% | |
| Michael McMahon | 10/10 | 945 days | 8.57 | 9% | |
| Graeme | 4/10 | 945 days | 6.77 | 7% | |
| wanchai anantikulchai | 5/10 | 945 days | 6.94 | 7% | |
| Will | 7/10 | 976 days | 6.59 | 7% | |
| Michael Stützle | 9/10 | 976 days | 7.24 | 8% | |
| Shira LA | 8/10 | 1004 days | 6.0 | 6% | |
| Eversons | 6/10 | 1035 days | 4.62 | 5% | |
| Audrey Wong | 10/10 | 1043 days | 5.43 | 6% | |
| Katrina | 8/10 | 1065 days | 4.89 | 5% | |
| Paul and Paula | 7/10 | 1071 days | 4.63 | 5% | |
| Nadene Wheatley | 7/10 | 1092 days | 4.55 | 5% | |
| Pam Rule | 10/10 | 1123 days | 4.95 | 5% | |
| Jo Jardine | 10/10 | 1172 days | 4.85 | 5% | |
| Laureen Trainer | 8/10 | 1263 days | 4.44 | 5% | |
| Brett King | 8/10 | 1279 days | 4.41 | 5% | |
| Belinda Clarke | 8/10 | 1314 days | 4.34 | 5% | |
| P Stiller-Johnson | 10/10 | 1317 days | 4.57 | 5% | |
| Kenny Werink | 1/10 | 1319 days | 3.33 | 3% | |
| Sylvie Meganck | 6/10 | 1340 days | 3.75 | 4% | |
| Jesse Kruithoed | 9/10 | 1350 days | 4.5 | 5% | |
| Jude Ong | 10/10 | 1460 days | 4.29 | 4% | |
| James Richmond | 3/10 | 1474 days | 3.28 | 3% | |
| Mike Guest | 10/10 | 1480 days | 4.25 | 4% | |
| Amy Yates | 9/10 | 1518 days | 4.17 | 4% | |
| Shelley Hancox | 9/10 | 1568 days | 4.07 | 4% | |
| Liz Cave | 10/10 | 1573 days | 4.06 | 4% | |
| Jessica Stokes | 10/10 | 1574 days | 4.06 | 4% | |
| Marene Fu | 10/10 | 1616 days | 3.98 | 4% | |
| María del Carmen Escandell | 9/10 | 1637 days | 3.94 | 4% | |
| Estelle Daniel | 10/10 | 1708 days | 3.8 | 4% | |
| Staffan Johansson | 8/10 | 1717 days | 3.59 | 4% | |
| Glinys Weller | 8/10 | 1752 days | 3.53 | 4% | |
| Allyson Taylor | 7/10 | 2065 days | 2.82 | 3% | |
| Alistair Millward | 9/10 | 2068 days | 3.1 | 3% | |
| Nurlaily Abu Bakar | 7/10 | 2071 days | 2.81 | 3% | |
| Andrew Cruickshank | 10/10 | 2071 days | 3.09 | 3% | |
| Jess Rose | 9/10 | 2099 days | 3.04 | 3% | |
| Silke | 7/10 | 2113 days | 2.74 | 3% | |
| Syed Riyazuddin | 7/10 | 2191 days | 2.6 | 3% | |
| Andrew Kermode | 10/10 | 2314 days | 2.61 | 3% | |
| Fabian Rodriguez | 10/10 | 2344 days | 2.56 | 3% | |
| Patricia Revel | 8/10 | 2407 days |  |
2.31 | 2% |
| Matt Weston | 7/10 | 2420 days | |
2.19 | 2% |
| David Spindler | 7/10 | 2437 days | 2.16 | 2% | |
| Daniel Robledo | 7/10 | 2438 days | |
2.16 | 2% |
| Maria Camen Santos Lopez | 7/10 | 2438 days | |
2.16 | 2% |
| Frank Jensen | 9/10 | 2452 days | |
2.34 | 2% |
| Matusala Habtemariam | 9/10 | 2461 days | |
2.33 | 2% |
| Joy Lambez | 10/10 | 2462 days | |
2.32 | 2% |
| Michael Sheridan | 9/10 | 2477 days | |
2.3 | 2% |
| Ariadna & Omer | 7/10 | 2527 days | 2.0 | 2% | |
| andrewmh | 9/10 | 2527 days | 2.2 | 2% | |
| Alex | 1/10 | 2679 days | 1.39 | 1% | |
| Grantygrant | 7/10 | 2771 days | 1.57 | 2% | |
| Raelene Vine | 8/10 | 2802 days | 1.58 | 2% | |
| doepie277 | 7/10 | 2861 days | 1.41 | 1% | |
| Hanneke P | 8/10 | 2861 days | 1.47 | 2% | |
| Karin Genyn | 10/10 | 2878 days | |
1.51 | 2% |
| Stephanie Levepue | 8/10 | 2896 days | |
1.4 | 1% |
| Oliver Kalmbach | 3/10 | 2901 days | |
1.13 | 1% |
| Nicholas I Allen | 10/10 | 2922 days | 1.42 | 1% | |
| David | 10/10 | 2922 days | 1.42 | 1% | |
| Cathyd07 | 10/10 | 2982 days | 1.31 | 1% | |
| Tjw | 9/10 | 3044 days | 1.19 | 1% | |
| sueadegizmo | 9/10 | 3074 days | 1.13 | 1% | |
| Christina Bruellhardt | 10/10 | 3149 days | |
0.98 | 1% |
| Andreas Schacke | 5/10 | 3152 days | |
0.79 | 1% |
| M Robinson | 10/10 | 3163 days | |
0.95 | 1% |
| Volker | 9/10 | 3176 days | |
0.93 | 1% |
| Sabine & Stefan | 10/10 | 3180 days | |
0.92 | 1% |
| Cindy & Glen Kerunsky | 9/10 | 3183 days | |
0.91 | 1% |
| Horst Langstein | 8/10 | 3189 days | |
0.86 | 1% |
| jeanolivier3 | 1/10 | 3196 days | 0.65 | 1% | |
| CMJ | 9/10 | 3227 days | 0.83 | 1% | |
| Ray Coombe | 10/10 | 3270 days | |
0.74 | 1% |
| neilqecosse | 9/10 | 3288 days | 0.71 | 1% | |
| qofd | 9/10 | 3471 days | 0.35 | 0% | |
| Sean Brownell | 9/10 | 3502 days | |
0.29 | 0% |
| Prideaux | 8/10 | 3512 days | |
0.26 | 0% |
| Bryan & Ineke Beck | 10/10 | 3512 days | |
0.27 | 0% |
| Chris Forrest | 9/10 | 3512 days | |
0.27 | 0% |
| Hanggi | 10/10 | 3513 days | |
0.27 | 0% |
| Ray Banham | 10/10 | 3513 days | |
0.27 | 0% |
| Gronewold Harm-Dierchs | 9/10 | 3517 days | |
0.26 | 0% |
| Coral Last | 7/10 | 3519 days | |
0.23 | 0% |
| T Lipscombe | 9/10 | 3525 days | |
0.24 | 0% |
| Tricia Goggin | 9/10 | 3525 days | |
0.24 | 0% |
| Mannebach & Siejert | 8/10 | 3530 days | |
0.22 | 0% |
| Caroline Sheridan | 10/10 | 3537 days | |
0.22 | 0% |
| Mr & Mrs Mackie | 9/10 | 3543 days | |
0.21 | 0% |
| Andy | 9/10 | 3548 days | |
0.2 | 0% |
| Maite Severins | 8/10 | 3552 days | |
0.18 | 0% |
| Derek Archibald | 8/10 | 3554 days | |
0.18 | 0% |
| Leslie Aldridge | 7/10 | 3554 days | |
0.17 | 0% |
| Ewald Waldner | 9/10 | 3557 days | |
0.18 | 0% |
| Augelika Berugard | 7/10 | 3560 days | |
0.16 | 0% |
| Versteeg | 9/10 | 3818 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| nuwee | 10/10 | 3867 days | 0.0 | 0% | |
| Stephen M | 9/10 | 3879 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| s_butler | 10/10 | 3886 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| Hilary and Chris Ayton | 9/10 | 3886 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| Benedict Fluthman | 8/10 | 3888 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| Ingrid Zell | 9/10 | 3889 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| Westermann | 10/10 | 3889 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| Peter G | 8/10 | 3892 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| Ian Watson | 10/10 | 3899 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| Jackie | 8/10 | 3917 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| Schygulla | 9/10 | 3918 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| Lasse Olesen | 8/10 | 3919 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| Sinjc Grude | 8/10 | 3923 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| Frances Hay | 8/10 | 3925 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| Diane Chapple | 8/10 | 3925 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| Anne Fri | 10/10 | 3925 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| nigelst | 9/10 | 3932 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| Stephanie K | 8/10 | 3939 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| Jennifer Templeton | 8/10 | 3943 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| Susi Schoetzler | 9/10 | 3946 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| sophiep | 9/10 | 3972 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| simonbo | 9/10 | 3972 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| tanh | 9/10 | 3973 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| marijad | 10/10 | 3976 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| alasiac | 10/10 | 3988 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| Eimear Doyle | 8/10 | 4000 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| X Neils | 7/10 | 4010 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| hellami | 9/10 | 4018 days | 0.0 | 0% | |
| SandyS | 10/10 | 4109 days | 0.0 | 0% | |
| Andrea | 9/10 | 4151 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| SSheil | 9/10 | 4219 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| JohannaB | 9/10 | 4251 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| Dirk | 9/10 | 4275 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| Doll | 9/10 | 4279 days | |
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 Fox Glacier TOP 10 Holiday Park experience has plenty of reviews and does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
Recent Reviews Adjustment
-2.49% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 50 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 129 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 126 | -2.44% |
| 127 | -2.46% |
| 128 | -2.48% |
| 129 | -2.49% |
| 130 | -2.51% |
| 131 | -2.53% |
| 132 | -2.55% |
| … | … |
Final Ranking Score
87%
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.