G'day, 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 Portobello Village Tourist 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.
Portobello Village Tourist Park
Valid Reviews
112 Valid Reviews
The Portobello Village Tourist Park experience has a total of 112 valid reviews. There are no 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 112 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 15 |
|
13% |
| 9/10 | 25 |
|
22% |
| 8/10 | 34 |
|
30% |
| 7/10 | 18 |
|
16% |
| 6/10 | 14 |
|
13% |
| 5/10 | 3 |
|
3% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 2 |
|
2% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
78.48% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Portobello Village Tourist Park valid reviews is 78.48% and is based on 112 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
30 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 112 valid reviews, the experience has 30 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 30 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 6 |
|
20% |
| 9/10 | 7 |
|
23% |
| 8/10 | 9 |
|
30% |
| 7/10 | 3 |
|
10% |
| 6/10 | 3 |
|
10% |
| 5/10 | 1 |
|
3% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 1 |
|
3% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
80.67% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Portobello Village Tourist Park face-to-face reviews is 80.67% and is based on 30 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
81.38%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Paul | 8/10 | 65 days | 100% |
| Rich | 7/10 | 157 days | 94% |
| Eline | 6/10 | 248 days | 85% |
| Laurie | 9/10 | 279 days | 97% |
| Hannah | 10/10 | 307 days | 97% |
| Shaun | 10/10 | 307 days | 97% |
| Anne | 8/10 | 338 days | 94% |
| Fredrik | 6/10 | 338 days | 82% |
| Nicolas | 7/10 | 430 days | 85% |
| Hayley | 9/10 | 491 days | 87% |
| Lindsay Byrnes | 8/10 | 613 days | 79% |
| Fabienne | 8/10 | 644 days | 77% |
| Ian Garcia | 8/10 | 673 days | 74% |
| Tine Warner | 9/10 | 704 days | 73% |
| Joel Fryett | 6/10 | 704 days | 63% |
| Loam | 6/10 | 704 days | 63% |
| M.K. | 9/10 | 796 days | 65% |
| Ryli West | 8/10 | 979 days | 46% |
| Steve | 9/10 | 1010 days | 43% |
| Jake | 10/10 | 1038 days | 41% |
| Arie | 7/10 | 1069 days | 36% |
| Julia | 9/10 | 1100 days | 35% |
| Debby | 9/10 | 1130 days | 33% |
| Lothar Valentijn | 10/10 | 1130 days | 33% |
| Sarah | 9/10 | 1130 days | 33% |
| Colin | 8/10 | 1161 days | 30% |
| Lisa | 10/10 | 1283 days | 22% |
| Anne S | 9/10 | 1375 days | 17% |
| Ana and Rob | 8/10 | 1952 days | 5% |
| Sandy | 9/10 | 1983 days | 5% |
| Maria | 6/10 | 2105 days | 4% |
| M&P | 8/10 | 2134 days | 4% |
| Tom Z. | 9/10 | 2165 days | 4% |
| Tea | 8/10 | 2196 days | 4% |
| Sue W | 8/10 | 2226 days | 4% |
| Maryline | 9/10 | 2440 days | 4% |
| Esa | 7/10 | 2471 days | 4% |
| Vincent | 9/10 | 2471 days | 4% |
| TP&MM | 8/10 | 2471 days | 4% |
| Chantal | 10/10 | 2561 days | 4% |
| James & Kerry | 9/10 | 2591 days | 3% |
| Melinda Pyke | 8/10 | 2652 days | 3% |
| Grizzly Girl | 8/10 | 2652 days | 3% |
| Esteban | 8/10 | 2805 days | 3% |
| Bridget Cumming | 7/10 | 2843 days | 3% |
| M A Pelton | 10/10 | 2846 days | 3% |
| UK 50-something couple | 8/10 | 2864 days | 3% |
| Suzanne Wijsman | 9/10 | 2872 days | 3% |
| Sandra Jeffers | 6/10 | 2972 days | 2% |
| Howard Morris | 8/10 | 2988 days | 3% |
| Geoff Steele | 7/10 | 3016 days | 2% |
| Matthias Wohlgemuth | 7/10 | 3243 days | 2% |
| sara hoeflaken | 8/10 | 3257 days | 2% |
| Roeland Driessen | 8/10 | 3259 days | 2% |
| Cyrielle Vallat | 6/10 | 3315 days | 2% |
| Susan H | 10/10 | 3354 days | 2% |
| Ruth Hernandez | 8/10 | 3356 days | 2% |
| Kate | 8/10 | 3489 days | 2% |
| Joanna du Toit | 7/10 | 3646 days | 1% |
| Yvonne Wu | 8/10 | 3870 days | 1% |
| Soizic Vandermeersch | 7/10 | 3893 days | 1% |
| Rossco | 6/10 | 3900 days | 1% |
| Erica b | 7/10 | 3900 days | 1% |
| Larry Dashiell | 9/10 | 3931 days | 1% |
| June Harris | 6/10 | 3990 days | 1% |
| Matthias Thorn | 7/10 | 3990 days | 1% |
| Richard | 8/10 | 4175 days | 0% |
| travelscot | 9/10 | 4236 days | 0% |
| Patricia Revel | 9/10 | 4267 days | 0% |
| Katarina | 10/10 | 4268 days | 0% |
| Gillian Scott | 7/10 | 4295 days | 0% |
| Julie Robinson | 7/10 | 4312 days | 0% |
| Julien de la lande | 6/10 | 4338 days | 0% |
| Wouter Bosch | 7/10 | 4338 days | 0% |
| Aude Moulin | 5/10 | 4338 days | 0% |
| Maya Bakker-deDreu | 8/10 | 4346 days | 0% |
| JoMary Smith | 8/10 | 4356 days | 0% |
| 2 tent travelers from Montreal | 5/10 | 4387 days | 1% |
| Grantygrant | 7/10 | 4631 days | 1% |
| Bertiethebus | 8/10 | 4662 days | 1% |
| Kadyan | 6/10 | 4662 days | 1% |
| Malgorzata | 6/10 | 4666 days | 1% |
| Moni Sangoi | 7/10 | 4690 days | 1% |
| Puma17 | 7/10 | 4721 days | 1% |
| David | 5/10 | 4721 days | 1% |
| Auger | 10/10 | 4759 days | 1% |
| Auger | 10/10 | 4759 days | 1% |
| Mike & Jennie | 8/10 | 5038 days | 1% |
| Balonno | 3/10 | 5087 days | 1% |
| lydzb | 6/10 | 5118 days | 1% |
| ncopas | 1/10 | 5118 days | 0% |
| Annie Breton | 6/10 | 5376 days | 1% |
| Robin Smith | 10/10 | 5379 days | 1% |
| Jim & Rebecca | 9/10 | 5385 days | 1% |
| Tony & Marina Greenaway | 8/10 | 5386 days | 1% |
| Chris | 8/10 | 5387 days | 1% |
| LandJ | 9/10 | 5393 days | 1% |
| Manfred & Gabi | 9/10 | 5404 days | 1% |
| Frank Lehe | 8/10 | 5406 days | 1% |
| Marieke and Bert-Jan | 8/10 | 5409 days | 1% |
| Roy Seymour | 8/10 | 5412 days | 1% |
| Sabine | 9/10 | 5671 days | 1% |
| Anna | 9/10 | 5676 days | 1% |
| Siebels Wilke | 8/10 | 5690 days | 1% |
| Peter Aerborg | 9/10 | 5694 days | 1% |
| Peter Brown | 10/10 | 5754 days | 1% |
| John Cox | 8/10 | 5764 days | 1% |
| Helmet Paula | 3/10 | 5771 days | 0% |
| Lorena | 10/10 | 5786 days | 1% |
| Alexis De Wilde | 9/10 | 5858 days | 1% |
| Decuq | 7/10 | 5859 days | 1% |
| Vivien Williams | 10/10 | 6110 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 Portobello Village Tourist Park experience has plenty of reviews and does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
Recent Reviews Adjustment
-0.71% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 42 days. However the Portobello Village Tourist 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 Portobello Village Tourist Park experience has been adjusted for 35 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 32 | -0.65% |
| 33 | -0.67% |
| 34 | -0.69% |
| 35 | -0.71% |
| 36 | -0.73% |
| 37 | -0.75% |
| 38 | -0.77% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
2.81% 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
84%
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.