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 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
81.36%
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 | 73 days | 100% |
| Rich | 7/10 | 165 days | 94% |
| Eline | 6/10 | 256 days | 85% |
| Laurie | 9/10 | 287 days | 97% |
| Hannah | 10/10 | 315 days | 97% |
| Shaun | 10/10 | 315 days | 97% |
| Anne | 8/10 | 346 days | 93% |
| Fredrik | 6/10 | 346 days | 82% |
| Nicolas | 7/10 | 438 days | 85% |
| Hayley | 9/10 | 499 days | 87% |
| Lindsay Byrnes | 8/10 | 621 days | 78% |
| Fabienne | 8/10 | 652 days | 76% |
| Ian Garcia | 8/10 | 681 days | 74% |
| Tine Warner | 9/10 | 712 days | 72% |
| Joel Fryett | 6/10 | 712 days | 63% |
| Loam | 6/10 | 712 days | 63% |
| M.K. | 9/10 | 804 days | 64% |
| Ryli West | 8/10 | 987 days | 45% |
| Steve | 9/10 | 1018 days | 43% |
| Jake | 10/10 | 1046 days | 41% |
| Arie | 7/10 | 1077 days | 35% |
| Julia | 9/10 | 1108 days | 35% |
| Debby | 9/10 | 1138 days | 32% |
| Lothar Valentijn | 10/10 | 1138 days | 33% |
| Sarah | 9/10 | 1138 days | 32% |
| Colin | 8/10 | 1169 days | 30% |
| Lisa | 10/10 | 1291 days | 22% |
| Anne S | 9/10 | 1383 days | 16% |
| Ana and Rob | 8/10 | 1960 days | 5% |
| Sandy | 9/10 | 1991 days | 5% |
| Maria | 6/10 | 2113 days | 4% |
| M&P | 8/10 | 2142 days | 4% |
| Tom Z. | 9/10 | 2173 days | 4% |
| Tea | 8/10 | 2204 days | 4% |
| Sue W | 8/10 | 2234 days | 4% |
| Maryline | 9/10 | 2448 days | 4% |
| Esa | 7/10 | 2479 days | 4% |
| Vincent | 9/10 | 2479 days | 4% |
| TP&MM | 8/10 | 2479 days | 4% |
| Chantal | 10/10 | 2569 days | 4% |
| James & Kerry | 9/10 | 2599 days | 4% |
| Melinda Pyke | 8/10 | 2660 days | 3% |
| Grizzly Girl | 8/10 | 2660 days | 3% |
| Esteban | 8/10 | 2813 days | 3% |
| Bridget Cumming | 7/10 | 2851 days | 3% |
| M A Pelton | 10/10 | 2854 days | 3% |
| UK 50-something couple | 8/10 | 2872 days | 3% |
| Suzanne Wijsman | 9/10 | 2880 days | 3% |
| Sandra Jeffers | 6/10 | 2980 days | 2% |
| Howard Morris | 8/10 | 2996 days | 3% |
| Geoff Steele | 7/10 | 3024 days | 2% |
| Matthias Wohlgemuth | 7/10 | 3251 days | 2% |
| sara hoeflaken | 8/10 | 3265 days | 2% |
| Roeland Driessen | 8/10 | 3267 days | 2% |
| Cyrielle Vallat | 6/10 | 3323 days | 2% |
| Susan H | 10/10 | 3362 days | 2% |
| Ruth Hernandez | 8/10 | 3364 days | 2% |
| Kate | 8/10 | 3497 days | 2% |
| Joanna du Toit | 7/10 | 3654 days | 1% |
| Yvonne Wu | 8/10 | 3878 days | 1% |
| Soizic Vandermeersch | 7/10 | 3901 days | 1% |
| Rossco | 6/10 | 3908 days | 1% |
| Erica b | 7/10 | 3908 days | 1% |
| Larry Dashiell | 9/10 | 3939 days | 1% |
| June Harris | 6/10 | 3998 days | 1% |
| Matthias Thorn | 7/10 | 3998 days | 1% |
| Richard | 8/10 | 4183 days | 0% |
| travelscot | 9/10 | 4244 days | 0% |
| Patricia Revel | 9/10 | 4275 days | 0% |
| Katarina | 10/10 | 4276 days | 0% |
| Gillian Scott | 7/10 | 4303 days | 0% |
| Julie Robinson | 7/10 | 4320 days | 0% |
| Julien de la lande | 6/10 | 4346 days | 0% |
| Wouter Bosch | 7/10 | 4346 days | 0% |
| Aude Moulin | 5/10 | 4346 days | 0% |
| Maya Bakker-deDreu | 8/10 | 4354 days | 0% |
| JoMary Smith | 8/10 | 4364 days | 0% |
| 2 tent travelers from Montreal | 5/10 | 4395 days | 1% |
| Grantygrant | 7/10 | 4639 days | 1% |
| Bertiethebus | 8/10 | 4670 days | 1% |
| Kadyan | 6/10 | 4670 days | 1% |
| Malgorzata | 6/10 | 4674 days | 1% |
| Moni Sangoi | 7/10 | 4698 days | 1% |
| Puma17 | 7/10 | 4729 days | 1% |
| David | 5/10 | 4729 days | 1% |
| Auger | 10/10 | 4767 days | 1% |
| Auger | 10/10 | 4767 days | 1% |
| Mike & Jennie | 8/10 | 5046 days | 1% |
| Balonno | 3/10 | 5095 days | 1% |
| lydzb | 6/10 | 5126 days | 1% |
| ncopas | 1/10 | 5126 days | 0% |
| Annie Breton | 6/10 | 5384 days | 1% |
| Robin Smith | 10/10 | 5387 days | 1% |
| Jim & Rebecca | 9/10 | 5393 days | 1% |
| Tony & Marina Greenaway | 8/10 | 5394 days | 1% |
| Chris | 8/10 | 5395 days | 1% |
| LandJ | 9/10 | 5401 days | 1% |
| Manfred & Gabi | 9/10 | 5412 days | 1% |
| Frank Lehe | 8/10 | 5414 days | 1% |
| Marieke and Bert-Jan | 8/10 | 5417 days | 1% |
| Roy Seymour | 8/10 | 5420 days | 1% |
| Sabine | 9/10 | 5679 days | 1% |
| Anna | 9/10 | 5684 days | 1% |
| Siebels Wilke | 8/10 | 5698 days | 1% |
| Peter Aerborg | 9/10 | 5702 days | 1% |
| Peter Brown | 10/10 | 5762 days | 1% |
| John Cox | 8/10 | 5772 days | 1% |
| Helmet Paula | 3/10 | 5779 days | 0% |
| Lorena | 10/10 | 5794 days | 1% |
| Alexis De Wilde | 9/10 | 5866 days | 1% |
| Decuq | 7/10 | 5867 days | 1% |
| Vivien Williams | 10/10 | 6118 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
-0.87% 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 43 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 40 | -0.81% |
| 41 | -0.83% |
| 42 | -0.85% |
| 43 | -0.87% |
| 44 | -0.89% |
| 45 | -0.91% |
| 46 | -0.93% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
2.87% 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
83%
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.