Ranking Score Explained
Hi there, 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 Queenstown TOP 10 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.
Queenstown TOP 10 Holiday Park
Valid Reviews
70 Valid Reviews
The Queenstown TOP 10 Holiday Park experience has a total of 75 reviews. There are 70 valid reviews that are included when calculating the ranking score and 5 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 70 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 24 |
|
34% |
| 9/10 | 17 |
|
24% |
| 8/10 | 18 |
|
26% |
| 7/10 | 4 |
|
6% |
| 6/10 | 2 |
|
3% |
| 5/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 4/10 | 3 |
|
4% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
85.00% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Queenstown TOP 10 Holiday Park valid reviews is 85.00% and is based on 70 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
16 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 70 valid reviews, the experience has 16 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 16 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 5 |
|
31% |
| 9/10 | 4 |
|
25% |
| 8/10 | 5 |
|
31% |
| 7/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 6/10 | 1 |
|
6% |
| 5/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 4/10 | 1 |
|
6% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
85.00% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Queenstown TOP 10 Holiday Park face-to-face reviews is 85.00% and is based on 16 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
86.45%
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 | Face-to-Face | Weight | Relative Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Douglas | 5/10 | 52 days | 80.65 | 92% | |
| Justine | 7/10 | 144 days | 88.01 | 100% | |
| Al | 10/10 | 296 days | 86.12 | 98% | |
| Shannon | 10/10 | 388 days | 76.14 | 87% | |
| Erin | 10/10 | 480 days | 63.49 | 72% | |
| Hannah | 10/10 | 480 days | 63.49 | 72% | |
| Charlotte | 10/10 | 510 days | 58.78 | 67% | |
| TP&MM | 10/10 | 602 days | 43.51 | 49% | |
| Zoe | 7/10 | 661 days | 31.71 | 36% | |
| Macker | 8/10 | 722 days | 25.69 | 29% | |
| Angela | 9/10 | 753 days | 23.53 | 27% | |
| Brad | 4/10 | 753 days | 18.59 | 21% | |
| helen reeve | 10/10 | 753 days | 23.53 | 27% | |
| Ray Tombs | 9/10 | 936 days | 9.01 | 10% | |
| Michael Stützle | 10/10 | 936 days | 9.01 | 10% | |
| Qi Moss | 10/10 | 967 days | 7.6 | 9% | |
| S Weslake | 8/10 | 967 days | 7.22 | 8% | |
| Adrian Trumper | 6/10 | 980 days | 5.89 | 7% | |
| Shira LA | 9/10 | 995 days | 6.58 | 7% | |
| Audrey Wong | 9/10 | 1034 days | 5.59 | 6% | |
| Jack James | 9/10 | 1053 days | 5.28 | 6% | |
| Paul and Paula | 8/10 | 1062 days | 4.91 | 6% | |
| Joanne Haslam | 10/10 | 1251 days | 4.69 | 5% | |
| Grace White | 10/10 | 1288 days | 4.62 | 5% | |
| Wendy Kildey | 10/10 | 1304 days | 4.59 | 5% | |
| Kerry Lee | 10/10 | 1331 days | 4.54 | 5% | |
| Robert Hunt | 9/10 | 1423 days | 4.36 | 5% | |
| Greg MacFire | 8/10 | 1428 days | 4.13 | 5% | |
| Shelly Stanchuk | 9/10 | 1451 days | 4.3 | 5% | |
| Margo Wiltens | 8/10 | 1475 days | 4.04 | 5% | |
| Becky and James | 10/10 | 1492 days | 4.22 | 5% | |
| Lyn Pobke | 8/10 | 1615 days | 3.78 | 4% | |
| Carl_Larsen | 10/10 | 1635 days | 3.94 | 4% | |
| Teresa Ash | 8/10 | 1691 days | 3.64 | 4% | |
| Gloria Berlari | 8/10 | 1701 days | 3.62 | 4% | |
| Caro G | 8/10 | 1823 days | 3.4 | 4% | |
| Paul Frost | 10/10 | 1831 days | 3.56 | 4% | |
| Aaron Soh | 7/10 | 1860 days | 3.19 | 4% | |
| Amy Steiger | 9/10 | 1909 days | 3.41 | 4% | |
| Karl | 9/10 | 1994 days | 3.24 | 4% | |
| John Drake | 4/10 | 2062 days | 2.46 | 3% | |
| Robert Warner | 9/10 | 2090 days | 3.05 | 3% | |
| Manuela Opprecht | 9/10 | 2102 days | 3.03 | 3% | |
| Leah Stewart | 10/10 | 2122 days | 2.99 | 3% | |
| tschavalon | 8/10 | 2213 days | 2.67 | 3% | |
| Ara Moore-Tuwhangai | 10/10 | 2367 days | 2.51 | 3% | |
| Andy Karl | 8/10 | 2487 days | 2.16 | 2% | |
| eagle | 1/10 | 2762 days | 1.27 | 1% | |
| doepie277 | 8/10 | 2852 days | 1.48 | 2% | |
| Ryan J | 10/10 | 2974 days | 1.32 | 2% | |
| Robin Sable | 9/10 | 3139 days |  |
1.0 | 1% |
| Sabine & Stefan | 10/10 | 3171 days | |
0.94 | 1% |
| Markus & Miriam | 8/10 | 3174 days | |
0.88 | 1% |
| Jonathan Philp | 9/10 | 3179 days | |
0.92 | 1% |
| CMJ | 9/10 | 3218 days | 0.85 | 1% | |
| Melissa | 8/10 | 3432 days | 0.41 | 0% | |
| Julie and Russ Charles | 10/10 | 3506 days | |
0.28 | 0% |
| Richard Dudfield | 9/10 | 3510 days | |
0.27 | 0% |
| bryfrance | 10/10 | 3514 days | |
0.27 | 0% |
| Nick Secker | 8/10 | 3542 days | |
0.2 | 0% |
| Margaret O'Sullivan | 4/10 | 3884 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| dring | 10/10 | 3892 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| Jann Clar | 6/10 | 3898 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| Gordon and Joyce | 8/10 | 3899 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| Paul | 8/10 | 3913 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| Rachel & Barak | 10/10 | 3915 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| meggles | 7/10 | 3917 days | 0.0 | 0% | |
| marleen451 | 9/10 | 4040 days | 0.0 | 0% | |
| JimmyK | 8/10 | 4241 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
| RobH | 9/10 | 4259 days | |
0.0 | 0% |
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 Queenstown TOP 10 Holiday Park experience has plenty of reviews and does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
Recent Reviews Adjustment
-0.62% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 54 days. However the Queenstown TOP 10 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 Queenstown TOP 10 Holiday Park experience has been adjusted for 33 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 30 | -0.56% |
| 31 | -0.58% |
| 32 | -0.60% |
| 33 | -0.62% |
| 34 | -0.63% |
| 35 | -0.65% |
| 36 | -0.67% |
| … | … |
Final Ranking Score
86%
The final ranking score once adjustments and rounding has been applied. This value is cached and recalculated each day. Therefore it may not be precisely accurate based on the other values presented.
If you have any questions or comments about our ranking score calculation please get in touch at info@rankers.co.nz.