G'day, 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 Marfells Beach Campsite.
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.
76 Valid Reviews
The Marfells Beach Campsite experience has a total of 79 reviews. There are 76 valid reviews that are included when calculating the ranking score and 3 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 76 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 26 |
|
34% |
| 9/10 | 20 |
|
26% |
| 8/10 | 18 |
|
24% |
| 7/10 | 7 |
|
9% |
| 6/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 5/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 4/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 3/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 2 |
|
3% |
85.13% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Marfells Beach Campsite valid reviews is 85.13% and is based on 76 valid reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here as a comparison to the weighted average.
21 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 76 valid reviews, the experience has 21 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 21 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 5 |
|
24% |
| 9/10 | 7 |
|
33% |
| 8/10 | 7 |
|
33% |
| 7/10 | 2 |
|
10% |
| 6/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 5/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
87.14% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Marfells Beach Campsite face-to-face reviews is 87.14% and is based on 21 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
91.89%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Katherine Patient | 10/10 | 233 days | 100% |
| Jan | 9/10 | 261 days | 98% |
| Simon | 10/10 | 323 days | 97% |
| Sylvie K | 8/10 | 384 days | 93% |
| Marine | 7/10 | 598 days | 76% |
| Mark B | 10/10 | 626 days | 80% |
| Bart | 10/10 | 718 days | 73% |
| Sebastian | 10/10 | 749 days | 70% |
| Nina S. Larsen | 10/10 | 1023 days | 43% |
| Arielle Lockheart | 8/10 | 1084 days | 37% |
| MB | 10/10 | 1268 days | 23% |
| Ben | 10/10 | 1388 days | 16% |
| Felix | 10/10 | 1449 days | 13% |
| Mark Hunter | 5/10 | 1663 days | 5% |
| Kev | 10/10 | 1753 days | 5% |
| Tim | 10/10 | 2028 days | 5% |
| Laz. | 10/10 | 2059 days | 5% |
| Valg | 9/10 | 2087 days | 4% |
| Amanda | 10/10 | 2118 days | 4% |
| Rebecca | 9/10 | 2240 days | 4% |
| Boardwalk Blss | 9/10 | 2302 days | 4% |
| Lauren | 8/10 | 2332 days | 4% |
| Kysha | 10/10 | 2424 days | 4% |
| cgu228 | 8/10 | 2484 days | 4% |
| Camping crew | 9/10 | 2545 days | 4% |
| Susie | 10/10 | 2818 days | 3% |
| helbel | 4/10 | 2849 days | 2% |
| Shannon Allison | 1/10 | 2849 days | 1% |
| Jasmine | 7/10 | 2880 days | 3% |
| Lukas | 7/10 | 2880 days | 3% |
| Molly | 9/10 | 2910 days | 3% |
| Jason | 1/10 | 3002 days | 1% |
| Shalmon | 9/10 | 3033 days | 3% |
| charlotte | 3/10 | 3124 days | 1% |
| Clobby | 9/10 | 3155 days | 2% |
| M A Pelton | 8/10 | 3165 days | 2% |
| Patricia Stitchbury | 10/10 | 3182 days | 2% |
| Keith Salway | 8/10 | 3194 days | 2% |
| Clive Craven | 9/10 | 3214 days | 2% |
| Rob & Colleen Elwood | 8/10 | 3547 days | 1% |
| James Jackson | 9/10 | 3642 days | 1% |
| Joanne Butfield | 10/10 | 3783 days | 1% |
| Mattijs Hoogenbosch | 8/10 | 3876 days | 1% |
| Daniel Pietzsch | 10/10 | 3881 days | 1% |
| Lisa Conradie | 9/10 | 3914 days | 1% |
| Matthew Hallowell | 9/10 | 3942 days | 1% |
| Antonio BENITEZ | 7/10 | 3944 days | 1% |
| Jojo and Jacky | 10/10 | 3989 days | 0% |
| David O'Loughlin | 10/10 | 3994 days | 1% |
| Martin Hofmann | 10/10 | 4156 days | 0% |
| Marine P | 8/10 | 4246 days | 0% |
| John G | 8/10 | 4250 days | 0% |
| sydneyaharris | 8/10 | 4250 days | 0% |
| Harriet MacMillan | 7/10 | 4267 days | 0% |
| Aram | 8/10 | 4299 days | 0% |
| Claudia | 10/10 | 4431 days | 1% |
| Ryan Lieston | 8/10 | 4585 days | 1% |
| Manuela | 8/10 | 4585 days | 1% |
| Heike Heller | 9/10 | 4594 days | 1% |
| Andreas Mouteiro | 10/10 | 4594 days | 1% |
| Evon Jones | 7/10 | 4616 days | 1% |
| Veeh Barrington | 8/10 | 4617 days | 1% |
| Héléna Degres | 9/10 | 4950 days | 1% |
| Michael Walker | 8/10 | 4983 days | 1% |
| Lorraine Walker | 9/10 | 4983 days | 1% |
| Jackie and Brian | 8/10 | 5063 days | 1% |
| gareth williams | 10/10 | 5162 days | 1% |
| Stuart Arrol | 10/10 | 5311 days | 1% |
| Carolee Webster | 9/10 | 5355 days | 1% |
| Graeme | 10/10 | 5375 days | 1% |
| Chris & Jen Spencer | 9/10 | 5386 days | 1% |
| K Wallis | 9/10 | 5711 days | 1% |
| Betten | 8/10 | 5711 days | 1% |
| Amanda Wallace | 9/10 | 5730 days | 1% |
| Luc Marchand | 7/10 | 5732 days | 1% |
| Daniela Seibel | 9/10 | 5732 days | 1% |
No Adjustment
Several adjustments to the weighted average may be added to improve relevancy and credibility. Marfells Beach Campsite does not meet the criteria for any of these adjustments to apply.
0.76% 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 folk 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.
93%
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.