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 Whakapapa 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.
Whakapapa Holiday Park
Valid Reviews
192 Valid Reviews
The Whakapapa Holiday Park experience has a total of 197 reviews. There are 192 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 192 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 48 |
|
25% |
| 9/10 | 62 |
|
32% |
| 8/10 | 40 |
|
21% |
| 7/10 | 27 |
|
14% |
| 6/10 | 4 |
|
2% |
| 5/10 | 4 |
|
2% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 3 |
|
2% |
| 2/10 | 3 |
|
2% |
| 1/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
83.70% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Whakapapa Holiday Park valid reviews is 83.70% and is based on 192 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
72 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 192 valid reviews, the experience has 72 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 72 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 8 |
|
11% |
| 9/10 | 18 |
|
25% |
| 8/10 | 23 |
|
32% |
| 7/10 | 20 |
|
28% |
| 6/10 | 2 |
|
3% |
| 5/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
80.97% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Whakapapa Holiday Park face-to-face reviews is 80.97% and is based on 72 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Christina | 2/10 | 51 days | 49% |
| LH | 7/10 | 79 days | 100% |
| Ana | 2/10 | 110 days | 49% |
| Charlie | 10/10 | 385 days | 99% |
| Morgane | 8/10 | 475 days | 92% |
| Jojo&Skoko | 10/10 | 475 days | 94% |
| Cam an | 3/10 | 506 days | 50% |
| Kc | 9/10 | 506 days | 91% |
| Bobo | 9/10 | 506 days | 91% |
| Emily | 9/10 | 506 days | 91% |
| Nadia | 9/10 | 536 days | 89% |
| Fabienne | 5/10 | 781 days | 54% |
| Jorian | 10/10 | 810 days | 67% |
| Mike Howe | 8/10 | 810 days | 66% |
| Sydney Piskor | 10/10 | 902 days | 58% |
| Anne | 6/10 | 933 days | 47% |
| Henry | 9/10 | 994 days | 47% |
| Ka Gill | 9/10 | 1086 days | 39% |
| Anne | 9/10 | 1116 days | 36% |
| Helen E | 8/10 | 1147 days | 33% |
| V L Nelson | 9/10 | 1175 days | 31% |
| Inge | 8/10 | 1206 days | 28% |
| Cindi Wight | 10/10 | 1267 days | 24% |
| Annie | 1/10 | 1663 days | 3% |
| Melissa | 10/10 | 1846 days | 5% |
| Jaeneen | 10/10 | 1905 days | 5% |
| Koe | 2/10 | 1936 days | 2% |
| Dan | 7/10 | 1997 days | 5% |
| Paul | 8/10 | 1997 days | 5% |
| Carl Bright | 10/10 | 2120 days | 5% |
| Ashleigh Lim | 10/10 | 2120 days | 5% |
| Linda | 9/10 | 2120 days | 5% |
| Reba | 9/10 | 2242 days | 4% |
| Stefan Hohmann | 10/10 | 2242 days | 4% |
| Peter | 10/10 | 2333 days | 4% |
| Su | 9/10 | 2333 days | 4% |
| Luis Vigil Vidal | 10/10 | 2363 days | 4% |
| Lua | 10/10 | 2363 days | 4% |
| Michal Mazaki | 3/10 | 2394 days | 2% |
| Bites | 9/10 | 2394 days | 4% |
| Chris Plummer | 10/10 | 2394 days | 4% |
| Martinez Whanau | 9/10 | 2486 days | 4% |
| Andy | 3/10 | 2486 days | 2% |
| Paige | 9/10 | 2577 days | 4% |
| Michael | 10/10 | 2577 days | 4% |
| David Hart | 9/10 | 2608 days | 4% |
| Beth | 9/10 | 2608 days | 4% |
| Tash & Laura | 8/10 | 2636 days | 4% |
| Francois & Caroline | 9/10 | 2667 days | 4% |
| Elke fuenfstueck | 6/10 | 2698 days | 3% |
| Rachael Dyson | 9/10 | 2727 days | 3% |
| Grizzly Girl | 9/10 | 2759 days | 3% |
| Ingrid Peters | 10/10 | 2759 days | 3% |
| Kenza | 8/10 | 2759 days | 3% |
| Jennie and kids | 9/10 | 2912 days | 3% |
| Martha Godon | 8/10 | 2912 days | 3% |
| Bradletn | 8/10 | 2942 days | 3% |
| Helene | 9/10 | 2973 days | 3% |
| The Weathersons | 10/10 | 2986 days | 3% |
| Helen Bond | 10/10 | 3001 days | 3% |
| Luis Vigil Vidal | 10/10 | 3015 days | 3% |
| Millka Pietikainen | 10/10 | 3043 days | 3% |
| Ronald Daigneault | 8/10 | 3056 days | 2% |
| Debbie Lesurf | 10/10 | 3070 days | 3% |
| Joe Trigg | 7/10 | 3095 days | 2% |
| Javier Mimbrera | 9/10 | 3153 days | 2% |
| Alexander | 10/10 | 3272 days | 2% |
| Mark Ravenscroft | 10/10 | 3278 days | 2% |
| Roger | 9/10 | 3293 days | 2% |
| Mailhos Cécile | 9/10 | 3341 days | 2% |
| Mark Haydon | 10/10 | 3365 days | 2% |
| Liz K | 10/10 | 3377 days | 2% |
| Erich Brueggermann | 7/10 | 3395 days | 2% |
| Monique Pos | 10/10 | 3418 days | 2% |
| abd malik ahmad | 8/10 | 3427 days | 2% |
| Gary Cohen | 9/10 | 3457 days | 2% |
| S Webb | 9/10 | 3457 days | 2% |
| Greg Mackay | 8/10 | 3518 days | 2% |
| Mikael Torres | 9/10 | 3551 days | 2% |
| Bianca Macri | 10/10 | 3633 days | 1% |
| David Elliott | 10/10 | 3671 days | 1% |
| Susan Woods | 10/10 | 3702 days | 1% |
| Torben Koop | 10/10 | 3706 days | 1% |
| Heather Scoltock | 10/10 | 3728 days | 1% |
| Ian Robb | 10/10 | 3731 days | 1% |
| Michele Johns | 10/10 | 3731 days | 1% |
| Steve Newton | 10/10 | 3732 days | 1% |
| Tine Fook | 9/10 | 3749 days | 1% |
| Paul Read | 9/10 | 3762 days | 1% |
| Sarah Hammond | 8/10 | 3762 days | 1% |
| Pablo Suarez Fernandez | 9/10 | 3763 days | 1% |
| Roel Boorsma | 9/10 | 3781 days | 1% |
| David Walter | 5/10 | 3783 days | 1% |
| Jo Batt | 9/10 | 3798 days | 1% |
| Jamie | 9/10 | 3823 days | 1% |
| Jule & Thomas aus Hamburg Elternzeit 2015 | 5/10 | 3854 days | 1% |
| Suzanne Vermeulen | 7/10 | 3855 days | 1% |
| Denelle Coutts | 9/10 | 3866 days | 1% |
| María del Carmen Escandell | 8/10 | 3893 days | 1% |
| Andreas Knipper | 9/10 | 3909 days | 1% |
| Niall Crosby | 10/10 | 3946 days | 1% |
| Julie Walles | 9/10 | 3946 days | 1% |
| Constantin D | 7/10 | 4101 days | 0% |
| holidaymad from Solihull | 8/10 | 4127 days | 0% |
| John K | 9/10 | 4188 days | 0% |
| Mark Fisher | 8/10 | 4188 days | 0% |
| GN100 | 8/10 | 4219 days | 0% |
| Daniel Capener | 7/10 | 4312 days | 0% |
| tim winders | 9/10 | 4342 days | 0% |
| Leonie Moeller | 9/10 | 4412 days | 1% |
| Gillian Scott | 9/10 | 4432 days | 1% |
| Janina Zwerver | 9/10 | 4436 days | 1% |
| Rita Hochstiasser | 9/10 | 4459 days | 1% |
| Matthias Freiling | 7/10 | 4460 days | 1% |
| Johannes | 8/10 | 4461 days | 1% |
| Bert Snel | 9/10 | 4492 days | 1% |
| kiwifamily2 | 8/10 | 4493 days | 1% |
| David Restell | 9/10 | 4677 days | 1% |
| David Lee | 8/10 | 4811 days | 1% |
| Christopher Saunders | 7/10 | 4841 days | 1% |
| Henrik Steinruecken | 7/10 | 4871 days | 1% |
| Ramon Keller | 10/10 | 4879 days | 1% |
| Anne Kerpershoek | 8/10 | 4881 days | 1% |
| Camille Gerjat | 7/10 | 4894 days | 1% |
| Faassen | 5/10 | 4897 days | 1% |
| Fam von Hattem | 7/10 | 4901 days | 1% |
| sueadegizmo | 10/10 | 5072 days | 1% |
| Mark Westebring | 9/10 | 5151 days | 1% |
| Be Groen | 8/10 | 5156 days | 1% |
| Daniel & Manuela | 8/10 | 5170 days | 1% |
| Graham Platt | 8/10 | 5173 days | 1% |
| Lars | 9/10 | 5173 days | 1% |
| Michael Stoll | 8/10 | 5174 days | 1% |
| Moritz | 9/10 | 5177 days | 1% |
| Dominique | 8/10 | 5177 days | 1% |
| Charlotte | 7/10 | 5179 days | 1% |
| Hardy | 9/10 | 5179 days | 1% |
| Marjolein Hartsuiker | 8/10 | 5179 days | 1% |
| Corv V D Hof | 7/10 | 5190 days | 1% |
| Guillaume Milcent | 7/10 | 5190 days | 1% |
| Lotte Foged | 8/10 | 5191 days | 1% |
| snoopidoops | 9/10 | 5224 days | 1% |
| Waldemar Schuler | 9/10 | 5271 days | 1% |
| Lardy | 8/10 | 5272 days | 1% |
| R & M Willows | 9/10 | 5272 days | 1% |
| Amelia Tan-MaKhmalchi | 10/10 | 5316 days | 1% |
| james11 | 9/10 | 5316 days | 1% |
| kelvin88 | 10/10 | 5316 days | 1% |
| Jon11 | 10/10 | 5316 days | 1% |
| john_seasoned_traveler | 10/10 | 5316 days | 1% |
| de Smedt | 9/10 | 5502 days | 1% |
| Philip Gierke | 7/10 | 5504 days | 1% |
| Knapen | 9/10 | 5510 days | 1% |
| Kuhu | 7/10 | 5514 days | 1% |
| Christian Pflegi | 6/10 | 5518 days | 1% |
| Marianne Wheatley | 10/10 | 5518 days | 1% |
| Wheeler | 7/10 | 5519 days | 1% |
| Nick Tinnemeier | 8/10 | 5520 days | 1% |
| Fam de Kruyf | 8/10 | 5527 days | 1% |
| Fee_MacIntosh | 10/10 | 5530 days | 1% |
| Vincent | 7/10 | 5534 days | 1% |
| Sanne | 8/10 | 5534 days | 1% |
| Erica Moorhouse | 8/10 | 5535 days | 1% |
| mr Schumader | 10/10 | 5544 days | 1% |
| Helene Descamps | 7/10 | 5546 days | 1% |
| Patrick Decoster | 8/10 | 5551 days | 1% |
| Jane Hancock | 9/10 | 5553 days | 1% |
| Nadia Husain | 6/10 | 5558 days | 1% |
| hendrik king | 9/10 | 5589 days | 1% |
| Christof | 10/10 | 5864 days | 1% |
| astridaus | 9/10 | 5864 days | 1% |
| Flora | 9/10 | 5897 days | 1% |
| John Harrison | 10/10 | 5902 days | 1% |
| anon | 7/10 | 5902 days | 1% |
| Pierre Pilon | 9/10 | 5903 days | 1% |
| Peter Koeck | 10/10 | 5904 days | 1% |
| Sebastien Briant | 8/10 | 5922 days | 1% |
| Schubert, Wolfgang & Claudia | 8/10 | 5928 days | 1% |
| Beute Jacob | 7/10 | 5936 days | 1% |
| Family van Hessem | 7/10 | 5943 days | 1% |
| Thomas Signes | 7/10 | 5950 days | 1% |
| kevinp | 7/10 | 5966 days | 1% |
| ilkal | 8/10 | 5971 days | 1% |
| elskeb | 8/10 | 5973 days | 1% |
| Hanne Wichmann | 10/10 | 5989 days | 1% |
| Steffi Marco | 7/10 | 5989 days | 1% |
| Volker Jåkel | 7/10 | 5992 days | 1% |
| MartinG | 8/10 | 6262 days | 1% |
| GillianK | 9/10 | 6264 days | 1% |
| Nick | 8/10 | 6272 days | 1% |
| Nick | 9/10 | 6273 days | 1% |
| Chris | 9/10 | 6278 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 Whakapapa Holiday Park experience has plenty of reviews and does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
Recent Reviews Adjustment
-0.33% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 70 days. However the Whakapapa 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 Whakapapa Holiday Park experience has been adjusted for 20 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 17 | -0.28% |
| 18 | -0.30% |
| 19 | -0.32% |
| 20 | -0.33% |
| 21 | -0.35% |
| 22 | -0.37% |
| 23 | -0.38% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
2.77% 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.