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 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
77.79%
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 | 307 days | 100% |
| RM | 3/10 | 369 days | 53% |
| Aoife | 9/10 | 430 days | 94% |
| Matt H | 8/10 | 888 days | 57% |
| Judy | 10/10 | 949 days | 52% |
| Miemil | 1/10 | 949 days | 21% |
| Stephanie | 1/10 | 1038 days | 17% |
| Jouke | 9/10 | 1130 days | 34% |
| Felix | 7/10 | 1799 days | 5% |
| Andrew Hammond | 8/10 | 2287 days | 4% |
| Lisanne | 4/10 | 2410 days | 3% |
| Kate | 7/10 | 2410 days | 4% |
| Beth | 9/10 | 2499 days | 4% |
| Regina | 8/10 | 2530 days | 4% |
| Angela | 8/10 | 2622 days | 4% |
| Ray Tombs | 9/10 | 2805 days | 3% |
| Michael McMahon | 10/10 | 2805 days | 3% |
| Shira LA | 9/10 | 2864 days | 3% |
| Claire Hodges | 6/10 | 2874 days | 3% |
| Alecsandra Dimofte | 6/10 | 2908 days | 3% |
| Emilie Krasowski | 8/10 | 2914 days | 3% |
| Gary Prescot | 7/10 | 2989 days | 3% |
| Vanessa Stubbs | 8/10 | 3013 days | 3% |
| c mccabe | 8/10 | 3048 days | 3% |
| Chris Nugent | 6/10 | 3131 days | 2% |
| Francis Williams | 9/10 | 3244 days | 2% |
| Luke Young | 9/10 | 3404 days | 2% |
| Aaron Gunning | 5/10 | 3562 days | 1% |
| Jane Louise Stokes | 9/10 | 3580 days | 2% |
| Glinys Weller | 9/10 | 3606 days | 2% |
| Jean marc Daubenfeld | 8/10 | 3620 days | 1% |
| Dennis Biedermann | 5/10 | 3717 days | 1% |
| Melissa Darlington | 10/10 | 3723 days | 1% |
| Stephanie | 9/10 | 3859 days | 1% |
| Erica b | 5/10 | 3901 days | 1% |
| Sam Smith | 8/10 | 3932 days | 1% |
| Andrew Cruickshank | 9/10 | 3932 days | 1% |
| Nonrev | 8/10 | 3960 days | 1% |
| Nina Müller | 6/10 | 3960 days | 1% |
| Kim Frey | 6/10 | 3995 days | 1% |
| Bjorn Privat | 2/10 | 4013 days | 0% |
| neil holdaway | 6/10 | 4022 days | 1% |
| Jacques Revel | 6/10 | 4267 days | 0% |
| Matusala Habtemariam | 8/10 | 4321 days | 0% |
| B D | 6/10 | 4325 days | 0% |
| sreve | 6/10 | 4356 days | 0% |
| Andrew Cattanach | 6/10 | 4356 days | 0% |
| GARRYBLOWER | 9/10 | 4387 days | 1% |
| Alan Blackburn | 7/10 | 4387 days | 1% |
| PipandJon | 5/10 | 4417 days | 1% |
| Stewart Littleford | 9/10 | 4478 days | 1% |
| Grantygrant | 7/10 | 4631 days | 1% |
| ramy | 2/10 | 4631 days | 0% |
| Patrycja Polakowska | 8/10 | 4672 days | 1% |
| Willem de Jong | 9/10 | 4683 days | 1% |
| Michael Nolan | 8/10 | 4690 days | 1% |
| Stripeyfish | 1/10 | 4721 days | 0% |
| Rob | 6/10 | 4738 days | 1% |
| Fred and Carin | 6/10 | 4741 days | 1% |
| Urs Kloter | 9/10 | 4743 days | 1% |
| Toby Clark | 9/10 | 5019 days | 1% |
| launch | 7/10 | 5027 days | 1% |
| Richard and Janet | 7/10 | 5030 days | 1% |
| Jeltje | 6/10 | 5036 days | 1% |
| Josef | 7/10 | 5037 days | 1% |
| Jim Addicott | 4/10 | 5040 days | 1% |
| Jim Delacruz | 8/10 | 5042 days | 1% |
| Horst Langstein | 8/10 | 5049 days | 1% |
| Frank Krivauek | 5/10 | 5050 days | 1% |
| Thyg Lingdal | 9/10 | 5055 days | 1% |
| Colin Jenkins | 7/10 | 5067 days | 1% |
| Herbert | 9/10 | 5069 days | 1% |
| Jackie & Ray | 10/10 | 5069 days | 1% |
| Fred Saunders | 10/10 | 5082 days | 1% |
| CMJ | 8/10 | 5087 days | 1% |
| Harry Simpson | 6/10 | 5125 days | 1% |
| Ruth & Derrick | 6/10 | 5131 days | 1% |
| Peter Spooner | 9/10 | 5135 days | 1% |
| Tamara | 8/10 | 5148 days | 1% |
| Jason Ritenour | 8/10 | 5209 days | 1% |
| qofd | 8/10 | 5332 days | 1% |
| Ilse & Thys | 7/10 | 5376 days | 1% |
| Victoria Boolsen | 10/10 | 5385 days | 1% |
| Malin Emanuelsson | 8/10 | 5396 days | 1% |
| Brian Clothier | 10/10 | 5397 days | 1% |
| D Hoekstra | 8/10 | 5416 days | 1% |
| Gerry Nichols | 9/10 | 5416 days | 1% |
| Mr & Mrs Winter | 9/10 | 5416 days | 1% |
| H Schepers | 8/10 | 5417 days | 1% |
| hendrik king | 7/10 | 5452 days | 1% |
| Mikeminch | 8/10 | 5483 days | 1% |
| kristy | 9/10 | 5544 days | 1% |
| Andrew Hammond | 9/10 | 5544 days | 1% |
| Zac Morris | 10/10 | 5574 days | 1% |
| Don & Geraldine | 7/10 | 5733 days | 1% |
| Brett & Tanille | 10/10 | 5746 days | 1% |
| Janny en Bert | 8/10 | 5748 days | 1% |
| Westermann | 4/10 | 5749 days | 1% |
| Shirley C | 8/10 | 5750 days | 1% |
| Pam Know | 5/10 | 5753 days | 1% |
| Colin Daniels | 5/10 | 5760 days | 1% |
| Janny Meerdinnk Veldboow | 8/10 | 5764 days | 1% |
| Bert Tonwen | 8/10 | 5767 days | 1% |
| Dale King | 7/10 | 5767 days | 1% |
| Dieter Groscurth | 8/10 | 5768 days | 1% |
| Gordon and Joyce | 10/10 | 5768 days | 1% |
| Yona | 7/10 | 5772 days | 1% |
| Pascal Auber | 10/10 | 5772 days | 1% |
| Silvia Kern | 9/10 | 5780 days | 1% |
| R Gilge | 9/10 | 5782 days | 1% |
| Nicole | 9/10 | 5783 days | 1% |
| Frances Hay | 7/10 | 5785 days | 1% |
| Paul Frew | 7/10 | 5795 days | 1% |
| Catherine Clavel | 7/10 | 5795 days | 1% |
| John J | 8/10 | 5800 days | 1% |
| Heino keyssler | 10/10 | 5806 days | 1% |
| middendorp | 8/10 | 5832 days | 1% |
| Robbertsen | 7/10 | 5840 days | 1% |
| Kirsty McGrath | 8/10 | 5852 days | 1% |
| Simon Bartholomew | 9/10 | 5860 days | 1% |
| Daniel Alonso | 10/10 | 5860 days | 1% |
| Ana Garcia | 10/10 | 5861 days | 1% |
| X Neils | 8/10 | 5870 days | 1% |
| Emily and Alex | 8/10 | 5875 days | 1% |
| PatH | 10/10 | 5892 days | 1% |
| Kazmeister | 7/10 | 6031 days | 1% |
| Johnnie | 8/10 | 6073 days | 1% |
| RussC | 7/10 | 6084 days | 1% |
| SteveB | 5/10 | 6092 days | 1% |
| Becca1 | 10/10 | 6094 days | 1% |
| RonB | 7/10 | 6104 days | 1% |
| Christine | 8/10 | 6105 days | 1% |
| LucyPoland | 9/10 | 6112 days | 1% |
| Suzie Lechner | 9/10 | 6112 days | 1% |
| ChrisWeb | 7/10 | 6126 days | 1% |
| VolkerS | 9/10 | 6126 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
-4.07% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 42 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 | -4.01% |
| 198 | -4.03% |
| 199 | -4.05% |
| 200 | -4.07% |
| 201 | -4.09% |
| 202 | -4.11% |
| 203 | -4.13% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
5.17% 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.