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 Mt / Mount Aspiring 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.
Mt / Mount Aspiring Holiday Park
Valid Reviews
115 Valid Reviews
The Mt / Mount Aspiring Holiday Park experience has a total of 117 reviews. There are 115 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 115 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 15 |
|
13% |
| 9/10 | 22 |
|
19% |
| 8/10 | 35 |
|
30% |
| 7/10 | 11 |
|
10% |
| 6/10 | 9 |
|
8% |
| 5/10 | 5 |
|
4% |
| 4/10 | 3 |
|
3% |
| 3/10 | 7 |
|
6% |
| 2/10 | 5 |
|
4% |
| 1/10 | 3 |
|
3% |
72.17% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Mt / Mount Aspiring Holiday Park valid reviews is 72.17% and is based on 115 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
62 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 115 valid reviews, the experience has 62 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 62 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 5 |
|
8% |
| 9/10 | 17 |
|
27% |
| 8/10 | 23 |
|
37% |
| 7/10 | 5 |
|
8% |
| 6/10 | 4 |
|
6% |
| 5/10 | 2 |
|
3% |
| 4/10 | 2 |
|
3% |
| 3/10 | 2 |
|
3% |
| 2/10 | 2 |
|
3% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
76.45% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Mt / Mount Aspiring Holiday Park face-to-face reviews is 76.45% and is based on 62 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
81.22%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pierre Leroux | 10/10 | 39 days | 100% |
| christina michael | 1/10 | 39 days | 40% |
| Eleanor Jackson | 6/10 | 39 days | 86% |
| david spencer | 8/10 | 70 days | 98% |
| Haydyn Bevis | 8/10 | 70 days | 98% |
| Jenny Hobson-Frohock | 10/10 | 70 days | 100% |
| Amy | 8/10 | 70 days | 98% |
| Marie-Claude Ruata | 8/10 | 98 days | 98% |
| Susan Melgaard Rasmussen | 3/10 | 98 days | 54% |
| Cees Koeman | 10/10 | 98 days | 100% |
| Colin Mitchell | 1/10 | 98 days | 40% |
| Kari Flanagan | 9/10 | 129 days | 98% |
| Paul T Beisser III | 10/10 | 190 days | 98% |
| Viktoria | 10/10 | 435 days | 89% |
| David | 10/10 | 435 days | 89% |
| C Emes | 10/10 | 463 days | 88% |
| Jessica Heinrich | 5/10 | 463 days | 67% |
| Aaron | 8/10 | 586 days | 79% |
| Laura | 7/10 | 616 days | 73% |
| Lu | 8/10 | 829 days | 59% |
| Millie | 10/10 | 891 days | 55% |
| Diana Antunez | 8/10 | 952 days | 47% |
| Sue | 10/10 | 1135 days | 32% |
| Felix | 9/10 | 1225 days | 25% |
| Charlotte Houël | 6/10 | 1225 days | 22% |
| Pateke | 6/10 | 2321 days | 3% |
| Phoebe | 8/10 | 2352 days | 4% |
| Johannes | 9/10 | 2627 days | 3% |
| Liz | 8/10 | 2627 days | 3% |
| Flatlanders | 6/10 | 2655 days | 3% |
| Maxime | 8/10 | 2686 days | 3% |
| JT | 8/10 | 2686 days | 3% |
| Mahi | 7/10 | 2717 days | 3% |
| Ray Tombs | 9/10 | 2961 days | 2% |
| Nicky Edwards | 7/10 | 3005 days | 2% |
| Maureen Allouche | 8/10 | 3012 days | 2% |
| Shira LA | 4/10 | 3020 days | 1% |
| Megan Mosto | 3/10 | 3072 days | 1% |
| Paul and Paula | 7/10 | 3087 days | 2% |
| Tammy Schein | 9/10 | 3112 days | 2% |
| Paul Morris | 7/10 | 3343 days | 2% |
| Laura Arbuthnot | 2/10 | 3501 days | 0% |
| Philippa and Adam | 5/10 | 3754 days | 1% |
| Tom Reber | 3/10 | 3922 days | 0% |
| Leah Stewart | 6/10 | 4147 days | 0% |
| Ben Sheridan | 6/10 | 4493 days | 0% |
| Caren van Gastel | 8/10 | 4513 days | 1% |
| Rory Seaton | 9/10 | 4513 days | 1% |
| Yosh Boy | 1/10 | 4665 days | 0% |
| Fred and Carin | 7/10 | 4897 days | 1% |
| Stefan and Brigit and Janek | 8/10 | 4900 days | 1% |
| Alex Laidlaw | 9/10 | 4915 days | 1% |
| Ton Franke | 8/10 | 4924 days | 1% |
| Ryan J | 3/10 | 4999 days | 0% |
| Robin Sable | 9/10 | 5164 days | 1% |
| Margreet Hanemaaijer | 3/10 | 5169 days | 0% |
| Rien | 9/10 | 5175 days | 1% |
| Matthias Angela | 8/10 | 5177 days | 1% |
| DavidT | 7/10 | 5183 days | 1% |
| lmoore | 2/10 | 5183 days | 0% |
| Vlutters | 8/10 | 5188 days | 1% |
| Elke Ingulf | 8/10 | 5192 days | 1% |
| B Sluis | 8/10 | 5192 days | 1% |
| Richard & Jane | 9/10 | 5192 days | 1% |
| Nigel Horrocks | 8/10 | 5193 days | 1% |
| Sabine & Stefan | 4/10 | 5196 days | 0% |
| Randewyk | 9/10 | 5196 days | 1% |
| Gerrit & Martina | 7/10 | 5197 days | 1% |
| Gabriele Wendt | 8/10 | 5197 days | 1% |
| Butz | 10/10 | 5198 days | 1% |
| David & Sue Lokkerbol | 5/10 | 5198 days | 0% |
| joerem | 2/10 | 5212 days | 0% |
| Brock Wagner | 7/10 | 5531 days | 1% |
| Leon van Hengel | 8/10 | 5532 days | 1% |
| Sophia Kelly | 4/10 | 5533 days | 0% |
| John Duffy | 10/10 | 5535 days | 1% |
| Steve & Pearl Baker | 8/10 | 5539 days | 1% |
| Julia | 9/10 | 5539 days | 1% |
| Bill Cutler | 9/10 | 5539 days | 1% |
| Katherine Forward | 8/10 | 5543 days | 1% |
| Gert Vogelaers | 9/10 | 5552 days | 1% |
| James Jackson | 6/10 | 5567 days | 0% |
| Fabian | 6/10 | 5568 days | 0% |
| Robert Cox | 8/10 | 5568 days | 1% |
| Claire Bulmer | 3/10 | 5572 days | 0% |
| Remco Smit | 10/10 | 5573 days | 1% |
| allan12 | 3/10 | 5608 days | 0% |
| Nuro | 8/10 | 5655 days | 1% |
| Pete & Chris | 2/10 | 5839 days | 0% |
| Lomas | 10/10 | 5844 days | 1% |
| maggie Webster | 8/10 | 5900 days | 1% |
| Giaque | 9/10 | 5920 days | 1% |
| Annie | 8/10 | 5936 days | 1% |
| Susan Hitchins | 9/10 | 5938 days | 1% |
| Terry Phillips | 8/10 | 5939 days | 1% |
| Rob Alston | 5/10 | 5942 days | 0% |
| S Luis Van Oler | 9/10 | 5947 days | 1% |
| Astrio Gregersen | 5/10 | 5971 days | 0% |
| gary mitchell | 10/10 | 6004 days | 1% |
| Colin S | 10/10 | 6012 days | 1% |
| Pia | 9/10 | 6015 days | 1% |
| Roma | 8/10 | 6027 days | 1% |
| Nathalie | 2/10 | 6245 days | 0% |
| Silvia Huerlimann | 6/10 | 6248 days | 0% |
| Thomas1646 | 8/10 | 6255 days | 1% |
| JohnN | 8/10 | 6265 days | 1% |
| Hans | 8/10 | 6265 days | 1% |
| Andy Baker | 9/10 | 6268 days | 1% |
| MrHebbard | 9/10 | 6281 days | 1% |
| CarolB | 8/10 | 6282 days | 1% |
| VolkerS | 9/10 | 6282 days | 1% |
| CateNetherlands | 9/10 | 6290 days | 1% |
| Heath | 7/10 | 6293 days | 1% |
| Joery | 8/10 | 6295 days | 1% |
| Ralf | 7/10 | 6347 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 Mt / Mount Aspiring Holiday Park experience has plenty of reviews and does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
Recent Reviews Adjustment
-0.22% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 86 days. However the Mt / Mount Aspiring 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 Mt / Mount Aspiring Holiday Park experience has been adjusted for 15 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 12 | -0.17% |
| 13 | -0.19% |
| 14 | -0.20% |
| 15 | -0.22% |
| 16 | -0.23% |
| 17 | -0.25% |
| 18 | -0.26% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
2.73% 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.