Hey, 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 Christchurch Tasman Holiday Parks.
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.
Christchurch Tasman Holiday Parks
Valid Reviews
136 Valid Reviews
The Christchurch Tasman Holiday Parks experience has a total of 138 reviews. There are 136 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 136 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 17 |
|
13% |
| 9/10 | 30 |
|
22% |
| 8/10 | 35 |
|
26% |
| 7/10 | 22 |
|
16% |
| 6/10 | 15 |
|
11% |
| 5/10 | 8 |
|
6% |
| 4/10 | 3 |
|
2% |
| 3/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 2/10 | 2 |
|
1% |
| 1/10 | 3 |
|
2% |
75.44% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Christchurch Tasman Holiday Parks valid reviews is 75.44% and is based on 136 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
75 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 136 valid reviews, the experience has 75 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 75 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 12 |
|
16% |
| 9/10 | 16 |
|
21% |
| 8/10 | 20 |
|
27% |
| 7/10 | 14 |
|
19% |
| 6/10 | 7 |
|
9% |
| 5/10 | 4 |
|
5% |
| 4/10 | 2 |
|
3% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
78.93% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Christchurch Tasman Holiday Parks face-to-face reviews is 78.93% and is based on 75 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
77.85%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mark B | 10/10 | 344 days | 100% |
| RM | 3/10 | 406 days | 53% |
| Aoife | 9/10 | 467 days | 93% |
| Matt H | 8/10 | 925 days | 54% |
| Judy | 10/10 | 986 days | 48% |
| Miemil | 1/10 | 986 days | 20% |
| Stephanie | 1/10 | 1075 days | 16% |
| Jouke | 9/10 | 1167 days | 32% |
| Felix | 7/10 | 1836 days | 5% |
| Andrew Hammond | 8/10 | 2324 days | 4% |
| Lisanne | 4/10 | 2447 days | 3% |
| Kate | 7/10 | 2447 days | 4% |
| Beth | 9/10 | 2536 days | 4% |
| Regina | 8/10 | 2567 days | 4% |
| Angela | 8/10 | 2659 days | 4% |
| Ray Tombs | 9/10 | 2842 days | 3% |
| Michael McMahon | 10/10 | 2842 days | 3% |
| Shira LA | 9/10 | 2901 days | 3% |
| Claire Hodges | 6/10 | 2911 days | 3% |
| Alecsandra Dimofte | 6/10 | 2945 days | 3% |
| Emilie Krasowski | 8/10 | 2951 days | 3% |
| Gary Prescot | 7/10 | 3026 days | 3% |
| Vanessa Stubbs | 8/10 | 3050 days | 3% |
| c mccabe | 8/10 | 3085 days | 3% |
| Chris Nugent | 6/10 | 3168 days | 2% |
| Francis Williams | 9/10 | 3281 days | 2% |
| Luke Young | 9/10 | 3441 days | 2% |
| Aaron Gunning | 5/10 | 3599 days | 1% |
| Jane Louise Stokes | 9/10 | 3617 days | 2% |
| Glinys Weller | 9/10 | 3643 days | 1% |
| Jean marc Daubenfeld | 8/10 | 3657 days | 1% |
| Dennis Biedermann | 5/10 | 3754 days | 1% |
| Melissa Darlington | 10/10 | 3760 days | 1% |
| Stephanie | 9/10 | 3896 days | 1% |
| Erica b | 5/10 | 3937 days | 1% |
| Sam Smith | 8/10 | 3968 days | 1% |
| Andrew Cruickshank | 9/10 | 3968 days | 1% |
| Nonrev | 8/10 | 3996 days | 1% |
| Nina Müller | 6/10 | 3996 days | 1% |
| Kim Frey | 6/10 | 4032 days | 1% |
| Bjorn Privat | 2/10 | 4050 days | 0% |
| neil holdaway | 6/10 | 4058 days | 1% |
| Jacques Revel | 6/10 | 4304 days | 0% |
| Matusala Habtemariam | 8/10 | 4358 days | 0% |
| B D | 6/10 | 4362 days | 0% |
| sreve | 6/10 | 4392 days | 1% |
| Andrew Cattanach | 6/10 | 4393 days | 1% |
| GARRYBLOWER | 9/10 | 4424 days | 1% |
| Alan Blackburn | 7/10 | 4424 days | 1% |
| PipandJon | 5/10 | 4454 days | 1% |
| Stewart Littleford | 9/10 | 4515 days | 1% |
| Grantygrant | 7/10 | 4668 days | 1% |
| ramy | 2/10 | 4668 days | 0% |
| Patrycja Polakowska | 8/10 | 4709 days | 1% |
| Willem de Jong | 9/10 | 4720 days | 1% |
| Michael Nolan | 8/10 | 4727 days | 1% |
| Stripeyfish | 1/10 | 4758 days | 0% |
| Rob | 6/10 | 4775 days | 1% |
| Fred and Carin | 6/10 | 4778 days | 1% |
| Urs Kloter | 9/10 | 4780 days | 1% |
| Toby Clark | 9/10 | 5056 days | 1% |
| launch | 7/10 | 5064 days | 1% |
| Richard and Janet | 7/10 | 5067 days | 1% |
| Jeltje | 6/10 | 5073 days | 1% |
| Josef | 7/10 | 5074 days | 1% |
| Jim Addicott | 4/10 | 5077 days | 1% |
| Jim Delacruz | 8/10 | 5079 days | 1% |
| Horst Langstein | 8/10 | 5086 days | 1% |
| Frank Krivauek | 5/10 | 5087 days | 1% |
| Thyg Lingdal | 9/10 | 5092 days | 1% |
| Colin Jenkins | 7/10 | 5104 days | 1% |
| Herbert | 9/10 | 5106 days | 1% |
| Jackie & Ray | 10/10 | 5106 days | 1% |
| Fred Saunders | 10/10 | 5119 days | 1% |
| CMJ | 8/10 | 5124 days | 1% |
| Harry Simpson | 6/10 | 5162 days | 1% |
| Ruth & Derrick | 6/10 | 5168 days | 1% |
| Peter Spooner | 9/10 | 5172 days | 1% |
| Tamara | 8/10 | 5185 days | 1% |
| Jason Ritenour | 8/10 | 5246 days | 1% |
| qofd | 8/10 | 5369 days | 1% |
| Ilse & Thys | 7/10 | 5413 days | 1% |
| Victoria Boolsen | 10/10 | 5422 days | 1% |
| Malin Emanuelsson | 8/10 | 5433 days | 1% |
| Brian Clothier | 10/10 | 5434 days | 1% |
| D Hoekstra | 8/10 | 5453 days | 1% |
| Gerry Nichols | 9/10 | 5453 days | 1% |
| Mr & Mrs Winter | 9/10 | 5453 days | 1% |
| H Schepers | 8/10 | 5454 days | 1% |
| hendrik king | 7/10 | 5489 days | 1% |
| Mikeminch | 8/10 | 5520 days | 1% |
| kristy | 9/10 | 5581 days | 1% |
| Andrew Hammond | 9/10 | 5581 days | 1% |
| Zac Morris | 10/10 | 5611 days | 1% |
| Don & Geraldine | 7/10 | 5770 days | 1% |
| Brett & Tanille | 10/10 | 5783 days | 1% |
| Janny en Bert | 8/10 | 5785 days | 1% |
| Westermann | 4/10 | 5786 days | 1% |
| Shirley C | 8/10 | 5787 days | 1% |
| Pam Know | 5/10 | 5790 days | 1% |
| Colin Daniels | 5/10 | 5797 days | 1% |
| Janny Meerdinnk Veldboow | 8/10 | 5801 days | 1% |
| Bert Tonwen | 8/10 | 5804 days | 1% |
| Dale King | 7/10 | 5804 days | 1% |
| Dieter Groscurth | 8/10 | 5805 days | 1% |
| Gordon and Joyce | 10/10 | 5805 days | 1% |
| Yona | 7/10 | 5809 days | 1% |
| Pascal Auber | 10/10 | 5809 days | 1% |
| Silvia Kern | 9/10 | 5817 days | 1% |
| R Gilge | 9/10 | 5819 days | 1% |
| Nicole | 9/10 | 5820 days | 1% |
| Frances Hay | 7/10 | 5822 days | 1% |
| Paul Frew | 7/10 | 5832 days | 1% |
| Catherine Clavel | 7/10 | 5832 days | 1% |
| John J | 8/10 | 5837 days | 1% |
| Heino keyssler | 10/10 | 5843 days | 1% |
| middendorp | 8/10 | 5869 days | 1% |
| Robbertsen | 7/10 | 5877 days | 1% |
| Kirsty McGrath | 8/10 | 5889 days | 1% |
| Simon Bartholomew | 9/10 | 5897 days | 1% |
| Daniel Alonso | 10/10 | 5897 days | 1% |
| Ana Garcia | 10/10 | 5898 days | 1% |
| X Neils | 8/10 | 5907 days | 1% |
| Emily and Alex | 8/10 | 5912 days | 1% |
| PatH | 10/10 | 5929 days | 1% |
| Kazmeister | 7/10 | 6068 days | 1% |
| Johnnie | 8/10 | 6110 days | 1% |
| RussC | 7/10 | 6121 days | 1% |
| SteveB | 5/10 | 6129 days | 1% |
| Becca1 | 10/10 | 6131 days | 1% |
| RonB | 7/10 | 6141 days | 1% |
| Christine | 8/10 | 6142 days | 1% |
| LucyPoland | 9/10 | 6149 days | 1% |
| Suzie Lechner | 9/10 | 6149 days | 1% |
| ChrisWeb | 7/10 | 6163 days | 1% |
| VolkerS | 9/10 | 6163 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 Christchurch Tasman Holiday Parks experience has plenty of reviews and does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
Recent Reviews Adjustment
-4.06% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 44 days. However the Christchurch Tasman Holiday Parks 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 Christchurch Tasman Holiday Parks experience has been adjusted for 200 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 197 | -4.00% |
| 198 | -4.02% |
| 199 | -4.04% |
| 200 | -4.06% |
| 201 | -4.08% |
| 202 | -4.10% |
| 203 | -4.12% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
5.14% 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
79%
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.