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
81.17%
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 | 72 days | 100% |
| christina michael | 1/10 | 72 days | 40% |
| Eleanor Jackson | 6/10 | 72 days | 86% |
| david spencer | 8/10 | 103 days | 98% |
| Haydyn Bevis | 8/10 | 103 days | 98% |
| Jenny Hobson-Frohock | 10/10 | 103 days | 100% |
| Amy | 8/10 | 103 days | 98% |
| Marie-Claude Ruata | 8/10 | 131 days | 97% |
| Susan Melgaard Rasmussen | 3/10 | 131 days | 54% |
| Cees Koeman | 10/10 | 131 days | 99% |
| Colin Mitchell | 1/10 | 131 days | 40% |
| Kari Flanagan | 9/10 | 162 days | 98% |
| Paul T Beisser III | 10/10 | 223 days | 97% |
| Viktoria | 10/10 | 468 days | 88% |
| David | 10/10 | 468 days | 88% |
| C Emes | 10/10 | 496 days | 86% |
| Jessica Heinrich | 5/10 | 496 days | 66% |
| Aaron | 8/10 | 619 days | 77% |
| Laura | 7/10 | 649 days | 71% |
| Lu | 8/10 | 862 days | 56% |
| Millie | 10/10 | 924 days | 51% |
| Diana Antunez | 8/10 | 985 days | 44% |
| Sue | 10/10 | 1168 days | 29% |
| Felix | 9/10 | 1258 days | 23% |
| Charlotte Houël | 6/10 | 1258 days | 20% |
| Pateke | 6/10 | 2354 days | 3% |
| Phoebe | 8/10 | 2385 days | 4% |
| Johannes | 9/10 | 2660 days | 3% |
| Liz | 8/10 | 2660 days | 3% |
| Flatlanders | 6/10 | 2688 days | 3% |
| Maxime | 8/10 | 2719 days | 3% |
| JT | 8/10 | 2719 days | 3% |
| Mahi | 7/10 | 2750 days | 3% |
| Ray Tombs | 9/10 | 2994 days | 2% |
| Nicky Edwards | 7/10 | 3038 days | 2% |
| Maureen Allouche | 8/10 | 3045 days | 2% |
| Shira LA | 4/10 | 3053 days | 1% |
| Megan Mosto | 3/10 | 3105 days | 1% |
| Paul and Paula | 7/10 | 3120 days | 2% |
| Tammy Schein | 9/10 | 3145 days | 2% |
| Paul Morris | 7/10 | 3376 days | 2% |
| Laura Arbuthnot | 2/10 | 3534 days | 0% |
| Philippa and Adam | 5/10 | 3787 days | 1% |
| Tom Reber | 3/10 | 3955 days | 0% |
| Leah Stewart | 6/10 | 4180 days | 0% |
| Ben Sheridan | 6/10 | 4526 days | 1% |
| Caren van Gastel | 8/10 | 4546 days | 1% |
| Rory Seaton | 9/10 | 4546 days | 1% |
| Yosh Boy | 1/10 | 4698 days | 0% |
| Fred and Carin | 7/10 | 4930 days | 1% |
| Stefan and Brigit and Janek | 8/10 | 4933 days | 1% |
| Alex Laidlaw | 9/10 | 4948 days | 1% |
| Ton Franke | 8/10 | 4957 days | 1% |
| Ryan J | 3/10 | 5032 days | 0% |
| Robin Sable | 9/10 | 5197 days | 1% |
| Margreet Hanemaaijer | 3/10 | 5202 days | 0% |
| Rien | 9/10 | 5208 days | 1% |
| Matthias Angela | 8/10 | 5210 days | 1% |
| DavidT | 7/10 | 5216 days | 1% |
| lmoore | 2/10 | 5216 days | 0% |
| Vlutters | 8/10 | 5221 days | 1% |
| Elke Ingulf | 8/10 | 5225 days | 1% |
| B Sluis | 8/10 | 5225 days | 1% |
| Richard & Jane | 9/10 | 5225 days | 1% |
| Nigel Horrocks | 8/10 | 5226 days | 1% |
| Sabine & Stefan | 4/10 | 5229 days | 0% |
| Randewyk | 9/10 | 5229 days | 1% |
| Gerrit & Martina | 7/10 | 5230 days | 1% |
| Gabriele Wendt | 8/10 | 5230 days | 1% |
| Butz | 10/10 | 5231 days | 1% |
| David & Sue Lokkerbol | 5/10 | 5231 days | 0% |
| joerem | 2/10 | 5245 days | 0% |
| Brock Wagner | 7/10 | 5564 days | 1% |
| Leon van Hengel | 8/10 | 5565 days | 1% |
| Sophia Kelly | 4/10 | 5566 days | 0% |
| John Duffy | 10/10 | 5568 days | 1% |
| Steve & Pearl Baker | 8/10 | 5572 days | 1% |
| Julia | 9/10 | 5572 days | 1% |
| Bill Cutler | 9/10 | 5572 days | 1% |
| Katherine Forward | 8/10 | 5576 days | 1% |
| Gert Vogelaers | 9/10 | 5585 days | 1% |
| James Jackson | 6/10 | 5600 days | 1% |
| Fabian | 6/10 | 5601 days | 1% |
| Robert Cox | 8/10 | 5601 days | 1% |
| Claire Bulmer | 3/10 | 5605 days | 0% |
| Remco Smit | 10/10 | 5606 days | 1% |
| allan12 | 3/10 | 5641 days | 0% |
| Nuro | 8/10 | 5688 days | 1% |
| Pete & Chris | 2/10 | 5872 days | 0% |
| Lomas | 10/10 | 5877 days | 1% |
| maggie Webster | 8/10 | 5933 days | 1% |
| Giaque | 9/10 | 5953 days | 1% |
| Annie | 8/10 | 5969 days | 1% |
| Susan Hitchins | 9/10 | 5971 days | 1% |
| Terry Phillips | 8/10 | 5972 days | 1% |
| Rob Alston | 5/10 | 5975 days | 0% |
| S Luis Van Oler | 9/10 | 5980 days | 1% |
| Astrio Gregersen | 5/10 | 6004 days | 0% |
| gary mitchell | 10/10 | 6037 days | 1% |
| Colin S | 10/10 | 6045 days | 1% |
| Pia | 9/10 | 6048 days | 1% |
| Roma | 8/10 | 6060 days | 1% |
| Nathalie | 2/10 | 6278 days | 0% |
| Silvia Huerlimann | 6/10 | 6281 days | 1% |
| Thomas1646 | 8/10 | 6288 days | 1% |
| JohnN | 8/10 | 6298 days | 1% |
| Hans | 8/10 | 6298 days | 1% |
| Andy Baker | 9/10 | 6301 days | 1% |
| MrHebbard | 9/10 | 6314 days | 1% |
| CarolB | 8/10 | 6315 days | 1% |
| VolkerS | 9/10 | 6315 days | 1% |
| CateNetherlands | 9/10 | 6323 days | 1% |
| Heath | 7/10 | 6326 days | 1% |
| Joery | 8/10 | 6328 days | 1% |
| Ralf | 7/10 | 6380 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
-0.54% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 114 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 48 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 45 | -0.51% |
| 46 | -0.52% |
| 47 | -0.53% |
| 48 | -0.54% |
| 49 | -0.55% |
| 50 | -0.57% |
| 51 | -0.58% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
2.83% 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.