Kia ora, 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 Dunedin 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.
Dunedin Holiday Park
Valid Reviews
142 Valid Reviews
The Dunedin Holiday Park experience has a total of 148 reviews. There are 142 valid reviews that are included when calculating the ranking score and 6 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 142 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 16 |
|
11% |
| 9/10 | 21 |
|
15% |
| 8/10 | 49 |
|
35% |
| 7/10 | 23 |
|
16% |
| 6/10 | 14 |
|
10% |
| 5/10 | 7 |
|
5% |
| 4/10 | 3 |
|
2% |
| 3/10 | 5 |
|
4% |
| 2/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 1/10 | 3 |
|
2% |
74.15% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Dunedin Holiday Park valid reviews is 74.15% and is based on 142 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
38 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 142 valid reviews, the experience has 38 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 38 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 2 |
|
5% |
| 9/10 | 8 |
|
21% |
| 8/10 | 13 |
|
34% |
| 7/10 | 6 |
|
16% |
| 6/10 | 3 |
|
8% |
| 5/10 | 2 |
|
5% |
| 4/10 | 2 |
|
5% |
| 3/10 | 2 |
|
5% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
73.68% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Dunedin Holiday Park face-to-face reviews is 73.68% and is based on 38 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
77.28%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| GUOZHANG CUI | 10/10 | 18 days | 100% |
| Gary Downey | 6/10 | 18 days | 86% |
| Andrew Lester | 6/10 | 49 days | 86% |
| Martin and Marie Scholing | 8/10 | 49 days | 98% |
| TS | 7/10 | 110 days | 92% |
| Keith Godfrey | 10/10 | 110 days | 99% |
| René Burkhard | 8/10 | 110 days | 97% |
| Rory M | 7/10 | 141 days | 92% |
| Michael Fraser | 5/10 | 171 days | 75% |
| Cafe | 10/10 | 414 days | 90% |
| Sarah | 7/10 | 414 days | 84% |
| Brett | 9/10 | 445 days | 88% |
| Debyron | 8/10 | 445 days | 87% |
| Lu | 8/10 | 720 days | 69% |
| Janneke | 9/10 | 720 days | 70% |
| Diana Heffner | 1/10 | 841 days | 24% |
| Nicky | 7/10 | 872 days | 53% |
| Shykiwi | 7/10 | 1025 days | 39% |
| Amy Fortin-Barrette | 9/10 | 1025 days | 41% |
| Lukas Meier | 2/10 | 1086 days | 16% |
| Laz. | 8/10 | 1086 days | 35% |
| Paul McLaughlin | 8/10 | 1114 days | 33% |
| RR | 6/10 | 1176 days | 25% |
| Colin | 9/10 | 1237 days | 24% |
| Carol | 9/10 | 1390 days | 16% |
| Rosie | 7/10 | 1632 days | 7% |
| Ogilvie family of 5 | 8/10 | 1875 days | 5% |
| Monkeyalan | 7/10 | 1997 days | 4% |
| Carla | 8/10 | 2210 days | 4% |
| Tanja & Sven | 6/10 | 2241 days | 4% |
| Nigel Crane | 10/10 | 2272 days | 4% |
| Corin Krainer | 5/10 | 2272 days | 3% |
| Fran | 6/10 | 2272 days | 4% |
| Stevie | 5/10 | 2516 days | 3% |
| Cassie | 9/10 | 2728 days | 3% |
| Kiri Edwards | 7/10 | 2790 days | 3% |
| Sue | 6/10 | 2790 days | 3% |
| sally m | 10/10 | 2820 days | 3% |
| Bailey Dunne | 8/10 | 2912 days | 3% |
| Benn | 8/10 | 2912 days | 3% |
| Angela MacPherson | 8/10 | 2931 days | 3% |
| Shira LA | 8/10 | 2940 days | 3% |
| Mark Lindeman | 3/10 | 2940 days | 2% |
| Jack James | 8/10 | 2998 days | 3% |
| Rodney Morris | 7/10 | 3032 days | 2% |
| Laeticia Coelho | 10/10 | 3038 days | 3% |
| Samantha Brewin | 7/10 | 3043 days | 2% |
| Suzanne Halfpenny | 6/10 | 3061 days | 2% |
| Charlie Dodds | 8/10 | 3087 days | 2% |
| Jo Dawson | 8/10 | 3171 days | 2% |
| Per Rantze | 1/10 | 3184 days | 1% |
| Chris Nugent | 10/10 | 3207 days | 2% |
| Josh Withell | 4/10 | 3261 days | 1% |
| Iris Maatman | 10/10 | 3267 days | 2% |
| Paul Smith | 8/10 | 3271 days | 2% |
| Frank Hofmann | 10/10 | 3271 days | 2% |
| Josephine Ayvadian | 10/10 | 3277 days | 2% |
| Walter Neff | 7/10 | 3305 days | 2% |
| Rebecca Lindsey | 8/10 | 3336 days | 2% |
| Lenka Pruherova | 8/10 | 3347 days | 2% |
| Sylvie Martel | 10/10 | 3355 days | 2% |
| Alex Dorrington | 10/10 | 3361 days | 2% |
| estelle D | 6/10 | 3367 days | 2% |
| Sheryl Hicks | 8/10 | 3409 days | 2% |
| Helen Keck | 10/10 | 3494 days | 2% |
| Philippa Buchanan | 8/10 | 3513 days | 2% |
| Sarah Hammond | 9/10 | 3531 days | 2% |
| Tony | 8/10 | 3611 days | 1% |
| Ray Tombs | 8/10 | 3628 days | 1% |
| Roland Tauchner | 3/10 | 3647 days | 1% |
| Peter Fink | 9/10 | 3652 days | 1% |
| David From Switzerland | 7/10 | 3716 days | 1% |
| Richard Kirby | 7/10 | 3717 days | 1% |
| Valerie Wee | 7/10 | 3741 days | 1% |
| Pang Albert | 7/10 | 3828 days | 1% |
| Fabien Metro | 9/10 | 3865 days | 1% |
| Nicole | 9/10 | 3923 days | 1% |
| Barry Goodwin | 5/10 | 4004 days | 1% |
| Larry Dashiell | 10/10 | 4008 days | 1% |
| John Drake | 6/10 | 4013 days | 1% |
| Bjorn Privat | 5/10 | 4089 days | 0% |
| Lucy Grund | 9/10 | 4099 days | 0% |
| Gianpiero Rodari | 8/10 | 4128 days | 0% |
| Bert Snel | 8/10 | 4128 days | 0% |
| Andrea | 8/10 | 4159 days | 0% |
| Rawiri johnston | 8/10 | 4281 days | 0% |
| Mike Fricker | 8/10 | 4342 days | 0% |
| Marek Heiurich | 3/10 | 4351 days | 0% |
| Stefan Glock | 9/10 | 4356 days | 0% |
| Brita Topp | 8/10 | 4373 days | 0% |
| Becky Davis | 8/10 | 4400 days | 1% |
| Ted Cole | 7/10 | 4401 days | 1% |
| Carina Borho | 8/10 | 4407 days | 1% |
| Markus Spitzmueller | 9/10 | 4408 days | 1% |
| Maya Bakker-deDreu | 8/10 | 4422 days | 1% |
| Andy Karl | 8/10 | 4432 days | 1% |
| Elly Zimmer | 5/10 | 4439 days | 1% |
| A Farquhar | 6/10 | 4493 days | 1% |
| Henrik Joshua | 8/10 | 4524 days | 1% |
| Kerri | 8/10 | 4554 days | 1% |
| Florian | 8/10 | 4707 days | 1% |
| Verena | 9/10 | 4729 days | 1% |
| Anja S | 9/10 | 4729 days | 1% |
| Moni Sangoi | 6/10 | 4766 days | 1% |
| Lis Bon | 9/10 | 4797 days | 1% |
| Martin | 8/10 | 4797 days | 1% |
| Hanneke P | 7/10 | 4797 days | 1% |
| Martyn Kool | 4/10 | 4814 days | 0% |
| Marieke | 4/10 | 4814 days | 0% |
| M Natterser | 8/10 | 4816 days | 1% |
| Katharina Pape | 9/10 | 4826 days | 1% |
| Kimothy | 8/10 | 5072 days | 1% |
| Hilbert vanEssen | 7/10 | 5100 days | 1% |
| Beeny | 6/10 | 5113 days | 1% |
| Peter Aertssen | 7/10 | 5118 days | 1% |
| John Heal | 8/10 | 5208 days | 1% |
| Heather & Jenny | 7/10 | 5209 days | 1% |
| neilqecosse | 9/10 | 5285 days | 1% |
| damaca | 1/10 | 5285 days | 0% |
| redmatthew16 | 9/10 | 5377 days | 1% |
| Ed Piotrowski | 8/10 | 5446 days | 1% |
| Graham Greentree | 8/10 | 5446 days | 1% |
| G Cucel | 10/10 | 5452 days | 1% |
| Siggi Wick | 6/10 | 5460 days | 1% |
| Barbara Link | 8/10 | 5460 days | 1% |
| Tinnermans | 7/10 | 5463 days | 1% |
| LandJ | 3/10 | 5469 days | 1% |
| Lenore Dejong | 10/10 | 5471 days | 1% |
| Mr & Mrs Mackie | 5/10 | 5479 days | 1% |
| Dana Pagliarini | 8/10 | 5485 days | 1% |
| Ellen Thompson | 3/10 | 5492 days | 0% |
| dollimyxture | 9/10 | 5528 days | 1% |
| nelliekaye | 8/10 | 5650 days | 1% |
| Paula Martinez | 8/10 | 5837 days | 1% |
| Dieter Groscurth | 7/10 | 5844 days | 1% |
| Jennifer Templeton | 8/10 | 5879 days | 1% |
| asselman | 8/10 | 5909 days | 1% |
| hellami | 8/10 | 5954 days | 1% |
| Ritag | 9/10 | 6040 days | 1% |
| GrahamM1 | 7/10 | 6201 days | 1% |
| Dirk | 8/10 | 6211 days | 1% |
| John | 6/10 | 6217 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 Dunedin Holiday Park experience has plenty of reviews and does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
Recent Reviews Adjustment
-0.06% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 53 days. However the Dunedin 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 Dunedin Holiday Park experience has been adjusted for 3 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 0 | -0.00% |
| 1 | -0.02% |
| 2 | -0.04% |
| 3 | -0.06% |
| 4 | -0.08% |
| 5 | -0.10% |
| 6 | -0.12% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
3.84% 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
80%
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.