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 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
116 Valid Reviews
The Mt / Mount Aspiring Holiday Park experience has a total of 118 reviews. There are 116 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 116 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 16 |
|
14% |
| 9/10 | 22 |
|
19% |
| 8/10 | 35 |
|
30% |
| 7/10 | 11 |
|
9% |
| 6/10 | 9 |
|
8% |
| 5/10 | 5 |
|
4% |
| 4/10 | 3 |
|
3% |
| 3/10 | 7 |
|
6% |
| 2/10 | 5 |
|
4% |
| 1/10 | 3 |
|
3% |
72.41% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Mt / Mount Aspiring Holiday Park valid reviews is 72.41% and is based on 116 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 116 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
82.04%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wing Pong Wing | 10/10 | 50 days | 100% |
| Pierre Leroux | 10/10 | 141 days | 99% |
| christina michael | 1/10 | 141 days | 40% |
| Eleanor Jackson | 6/10 | 141 days | 85% |
| david spencer | 8/10 | 172 days | 96% |
| Haydyn Bevis | 8/10 | 172 days | 96% |
| Jenny Hobson-Frohock | 10/10 | 172 days | 98% |
| Amy | 8/10 | 172 days | 96% |
| Marie-Claude Ruata | 8/10 | 200 days | 96% |
| Susan Melgaard Rasmussen | 3/10 | 200 days | 53% |
| Cees Koeman | 10/10 | 200 days | 98% |
| Colin Mitchell | 1/10 | 200 days | 40% |
| Kari Flanagan | 9/10 | 231 days | 96% |
| Paul T Beisser III | 10/10 | 292 days | 95% |
| Viktoria | 10/10 | 537 days | 84% |
| David | 10/10 | 537 days | 84% |
| C Emes | 10/10 | 565 days | 82% |
| Jessica Heinrich | 5/10 | 565 days | 62% |
| Aaron | 8/10 | 688 days | 72% |
| Laura | 7/10 | 718 days | 66% |
| Lu | 8/10 | 931 days | 50% |
| Millie | 10/10 | 993 days | 44% |
| Diana Antunez | 8/10 | 1054 days | 38% |
| Sue | 10/10 | 1237 days | 25% |
| Felix | 9/10 | 1327 days | 19% |
| Charlotte Houël | 6/10 | 1327 days | 16% |
| Pateke | 6/10 | 2423 days | 3% |
| Phoebe | 8/10 | 2454 days | 3% |
| Johannes | 9/10 | 2729 days | 3% |
| Liz | 8/10 | 2729 days | 3% |
| Flatlanders | 6/10 | 2757 days | 3% |
| Maxime | 8/10 | 2788 days | 3% |
| JT | 8/10 | 2788 days | 3% |
| Mahi | 7/10 | 2819 days | 3% |
| Ray Tombs | 9/10 | 3063 days | 2% |
| Nicky Edwards | 7/10 | 3107 days | 2% |
| Maureen Allouche | 8/10 | 3114 days | 2% |
| Shira LA | 4/10 | 3122 days | 1% |
| Megan Mosto | 3/10 | 3174 days | 1% |
| Paul and Paula | 7/10 | 3189 days | 2% |
| Tammy Schein | 9/10 | 3214 days | 2% |
| Paul Morris | 7/10 | 3445 days | 1% |
| Laura Arbuthnot | 2/10 | 3603 days | 0% |
| Philippa and Adam | 5/10 | 3856 days | 1% |
| Tom Reber | 3/10 | 4024 days | 0% |
| Leah Stewart | 6/10 | 4249 days | 0% |
| Ben Sheridan | 6/10 | 4595 days | 1% |
| Caren van Gastel | 8/10 | 4615 days | 1% |
| Rory Seaton | 9/10 | 4615 days | 1% |
| Yosh Boy | 1/10 | 4767 days | 0% |
| Fred and Carin | 7/10 | 4999 days | 1% |
| Stefan and Brigit and Janek | 8/10 | 5002 days | 1% |
| Alex Laidlaw | 9/10 | 5017 days | 1% |
| Ton Franke | 8/10 | 5026 days | 1% |
| Ryan J | 3/10 | 5101 days | 0% |
| Robin Sable | 9/10 | 5266 days | 1% |
| Margreet Hanemaaijer | 3/10 | 5271 days | 0% |
| Rien | 9/10 | 5277 days | 1% |
| Matthias Angela | 8/10 | 5279 days | 1% |
| DavidT | 7/10 | 5285 days | 1% |
| lmoore | 2/10 | 5285 days | 0% |
| Vlutters | 8/10 | 5290 days | 1% |
| Elke Ingulf | 8/10 | 5294 days | 1% |
| B Sluis | 8/10 | 5294 days | 1% |
| Richard & Jane | 9/10 | 5294 days | 1% |
| Nigel Horrocks | 8/10 | 5295 days | 1% |
| Sabine & Stefan | 4/10 | 5298 days | 0% |
| Randewyk | 9/10 | 5298 days | 1% |
| Gerrit & Martina | 7/10 | 5299 days | 1% |
| Gabriele Wendt | 8/10 | 5299 days | 1% |
| Butz | 10/10 | 5300 days | 1% |
| David & Sue Lokkerbol | 5/10 | 5300 days | 1% |
| joerem | 2/10 | 5314 days | 0% |
| Brock Wagner | 7/10 | 5633 days | 1% |
| Leon van Hengel | 8/10 | 5634 days | 1% |
| Sophia Kelly | 4/10 | 5635 days | 0% |
| John Duffy | 10/10 | 5637 days | 1% |
| Steve & Pearl Baker | 8/10 | 5641 days | 1% |
| Julia | 9/10 | 5641 days | 1% |
| Bill Cutler | 9/10 | 5641 days | 1% |
| Katherine Forward | 8/10 | 5645 days | 1% |
| Gert Vogelaers | 9/10 | 5654 days | 1% |
| James Jackson | 6/10 | 5669 days | 1% |
| Fabian | 6/10 | 5670 days | 1% |
| Robert Cox | 8/10 | 5670 days | 1% |
| Claire Bulmer | 3/10 | 5674 days | 0% |
| Remco Smit | 10/10 | 5675 days | 1% |
| allan12 | 3/10 | 5710 days | 0% |
| Nuro | 8/10 | 5757 days | 1% |
| Pete & Chris | 2/10 | 5941 days | 0% |
| Lomas | 10/10 | 5946 days | 1% |
| maggie Webster | 8/10 | 6002 days | 1% |
| Giaque | 9/10 | 6022 days | 1% |
| Annie | 8/10 | 6038 days | 1% |
| Susan Hitchins | 9/10 | 6040 days | 1% |
| Terry Phillips | 8/10 | 6041 days | 1% |
| Rob Alston | 5/10 | 6044 days | 1% |
| S Luis Van Oler | 9/10 | 6049 days | 1% |
| Astrio Gregersen | 5/10 | 6073 days | 1% |
| gary mitchell | 10/10 | 6106 days | 1% |
| Colin S | 10/10 | 6114 days | 1% |
| Pia | 9/10 | 6117 days | 1% |
| Roma | 8/10 | 6129 days | 1% |
| Nathalie | 2/10 | 6347 days | 0% |
| Silvia Huerlimann | 6/10 | 6350 days | 1% |
| Thomas1646 | 8/10 | 6357 days | 1% |
| JohnN | 8/10 | 6367 days | 1% |
| Hans | 8/10 | 6367 days | 1% |
| Andy Baker | 9/10 | 6370 days | 1% |
| MrHebbard | 9/10 | 6383 days | 1% |
| CarolB | 8/10 | 6384 days | 1% |
| VolkerS | 9/10 | 6384 days | 1% |
| CateNetherlands | 9/10 | 6392 days | 1% |
| Heath | 7/10 | 6395 days | 1% |
| Joery | 8/10 | 6397 days | 1% |
| Ralf | 7/10 | 6449 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
-0.23% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 109 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 19 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 16 | -0.19% |
| 17 | -0.20% |
| 18 | -0.21% |
| 19 | -0.23% |
| 20 | -0.24% |
| 21 | -0.25% |
| 22 | -0.26% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
2.53% 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.