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
80.43%
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 | 234 days | 49% |
| LH | 7/10 | 262 days | 100% |
| Ana | 2/10 | 293 days | 48% |
| Charlie | 10/10 | 568 days | 91% |
| Morgane | 8/10 | 658 days | 83% |
| Jojo&Skoko | 10/10 | 658 days | 84% |
| Cam an | 3/10 | 689 days | 44% |
| Kc | 9/10 | 689 days | 81% |
| Bobo | 9/10 | 689 days | 81% |
| Emily | 9/10 | 689 days | 81% |
| Nadia | 9/10 | 719 days | 78% |
| Fabienne | 5/10 | 964 days | 40% |
| Jorian | 10/10 | 993 days | 50% |
| Mike Howe | 8/10 | 993 days | 49% |
| Sydney Piskor | 10/10 | 1085 days | 41% |
| Anne | 6/10 | 1116 days | 32% |
| Henry | 9/10 | 1177 days | 32% |
| Ka Gill | 9/10 | 1269 days | 25% |
| Anne | 9/10 | 1299 days | 23% |
| Helen E | 8/10 | 1330 days | 21% |
| V L Nelson | 9/10 | 1358 days | 19% |
| Inge | 8/10 | 1389 days | 17% |
| Cindi Wight | 10/10 | 1450 days | 15% |
| Annie | 1/10 | 1846 days | 2% |
| Melissa | 10/10 | 2029 days | 5% |
| Jaeneen | 10/10 | 2088 days | 5% |
| Koe | 2/10 | 2119 days | 2% |
| Dan | 7/10 | 2180 days | 4% |
| Paul | 8/10 | 2180 days | 5% |
| Carl Bright | 10/10 | 2303 days | 5% |
| Ashleigh Lim | 10/10 | 2303 days | 5% |
| Linda | 9/10 | 2303 days | 4% |
| Reba | 9/10 | 2425 days | 4% |
| Stefan Hohmann | 10/10 | 2425 days | 4% |
| Peter | 10/10 | 2516 days | 4% |
| Su | 9/10 | 2516 days | 4% |
| Luis Vigil Vidal | 10/10 | 2546 days | 4% |
| Lua | 10/10 | 2546 days | 4% |
| Michal Mazaki | 3/10 | 2577 days | 2% |
| Bites | 9/10 | 2577 days | 4% |
| Chris Plummer | 10/10 | 2577 days | 4% |
| Martinez Whanau | 9/10 | 2669 days | 4% |
| Andy | 3/10 | 2669 days | 2% |
| Paige | 9/10 | 2760 days | 3% |
| Michael | 10/10 | 2760 days | 4% |
| David Hart | 9/10 | 2791 days | 3% |
| Beth | 9/10 | 2791 days | 3% |
| Tash & Laura | 8/10 | 2819 days | 3% |
| Francois & Caroline | 9/10 | 2850 days | 3% |
| Elke fuenfstueck | 6/10 | 2881 days | 3% |
| Rachael Dyson | 9/10 | 2911 days | 3% |
| Grizzly Girl | 9/10 | 2942 days | 3% |
| Ingrid Peters | 10/10 | 2942 days | 3% |
| Kenza | 8/10 | 2942 days | 3% |
| Jennie and kids | 9/10 | 3095 days | 3% |
| Martha Godon | 8/10 | 3095 days | 3% |
| Bradletn | 8/10 | 3125 days | 3% |
| Helene | 9/10 | 3156 days | 3% |
| The Weathersons | 10/10 | 3169 days | 2% |
| Helen Bond | 10/10 | 3184 days | 3% |
| Luis Vigil Vidal | 10/10 | 3198 days | 2% |
| Millka Pietikainen | 10/10 | 3226 days | 3% |
| Ronald Daigneault | 8/10 | 3239 days | 2% |
| Debbie Lesurf | 10/10 | 3253 days | 2% |
| Joe Trigg | 7/10 | 3278 days | 2% |
| Javier Mimbrera | 9/10 | 3337 days | 2% |
| Alexander | 10/10 | 3455 days | 2% |
| Mark Ravenscroft | 10/10 | 3461 days | 2% |
| Roger | 9/10 | 3476 days | 2% |
| Mailhos Cécile | 9/10 | 3524 days | 2% |
| Mark Haydon | 10/10 | 3549 days | 2% |
| Liz K | 10/10 | 3560 days | 2% |
| Erich Brueggermann | 7/10 | 3578 days | 2% |
| Monique Pos | 10/10 | 3601 days | 2% |
| abd malik ahmad | 8/10 | 3611 days | 2% |
| Gary Cohen | 9/10 | 3641 days | 2% |
| S Webb | 9/10 | 3641 days | 2% |
| Greg Mackay | 8/10 | 3702 days | 1% |
| Mikael Torres | 9/10 | 3734 days | 1% |
| Bianca Macri | 10/10 | 3816 days | 1% |
| David Elliott | 10/10 | 3855 days | 1% |
| Susan Woods | 10/10 | 3886 days | 1% |
| Torben Koop | 10/10 | 3889 days | 1% |
| Heather Scoltock | 10/10 | 3911 days | 1% |
| Ian Robb | 10/10 | 3915 days | 1% |
| Michele Johns | 10/10 | 3915 days | 1% |
| Steve Newton | 10/10 | 3915 days | 1% |
| Tine Fook | 9/10 | 3932 days | 1% |
| Paul Read | 9/10 | 3946 days | 1% |
| Sarah Hammond | 8/10 | 3946 days | 1% |
| Pablo Suarez Fernandez | 9/10 | 3946 days | 1% |
| Roel Boorsma | 9/10 | 3964 days | 1% |
| David Walter | 5/10 | 3966 days | 1% |
| Jo Batt | 9/10 | 3981 days | 1% |
| Jamie | 9/10 | 4007 days | 1% |
| Jule & Thomas aus Hamburg Elternzeit 2015 | 5/10 | 4038 days | 1% |
| Suzanne Vermeulen | 7/10 | 4038 days | 1% |
| Denelle Coutts | 9/10 | 4049 days | 1% |
| María del Carmen Escandell | 8/10 | 4076 days | 1% |
| Andreas Knipper | 9/10 | 4092 days | 1% |
| Niall Crosby | 10/10 | 4130 days | 1% |
| Julie Walles | 9/10 | 4130 days | 1% |
| Constantin D | 7/10 | 4284 days | 0% |
| holidaymad from Solihull | 8/10 | 4311 days | 0% |
| John K | 9/10 | 4372 days | 0% |
| Mark Fisher | 8/10 | 4372 days | 0% |
| GN100 | 8/10 | 4403 days | 1% |
| Daniel Capener | 7/10 | 4495 days | 1% |
| tim winders | 9/10 | 4525 days | 1% |
| Leonie Moeller | 9/10 | 4595 days | 1% |
| Gillian Scott | 9/10 | 4615 days | 1% |
| Janina Zwerver | 9/10 | 4619 days | 1% |
| Rita Hochstiasser | 9/10 | 4642 days | 1% |
| Matthias Freiling | 7/10 | 4643 days | 1% |
| Johannes | 8/10 | 4644 days | 1% |
| Bert Snel | 9/10 | 4676 days | 1% |
| kiwifamily2 | 8/10 | 4676 days | 1% |
| David Restell | 9/10 | 4860 days | 1% |
| David Lee | 8/10 | 4994 days | 1% |
| Christopher Saunders | 7/10 | 5024 days | 1% |
| Henrik Steinruecken | 7/10 | 5054 days | 1% |
| Ramon Keller | 10/10 | 5062 days | 1% |
| Anne Kerpershoek | 8/10 | 5064 days | 1% |
| Camille Gerjat | 7/10 | 5077 days | 1% |
| Faassen | 5/10 | 5080 days | 1% |
| Fam von Hattem | 7/10 | 5084 days | 1% |
| sueadegizmo | 10/10 | 5255 days | 1% |
| Mark Westebring | 9/10 | 5334 days | 1% |
| Be Groen | 8/10 | 5339 days | 1% |
| Daniel & Manuela | 8/10 | 5353 days | 1% |
| Graham Platt | 8/10 | 5356 days | 1% |
| Lars | 9/10 | 5356 days | 1% |
| Michael Stoll | 8/10 | 5357 days | 1% |
| Moritz | 9/10 | 5360 days | 1% |
| Dominique | 8/10 | 5360 days | 1% |
| Charlotte | 7/10 | 5362 days | 1% |
| Hardy | 9/10 | 5362 days | 1% |
| Marjolein Hartsuiker | 8/10 | 5362 days | 1% |
| Corv V D Hof | 7/10 | 5373 days | 1% |
| Guillaume Milcent | 7/10 | 5373 days | 1% |
| Lotte Foged | 8/10 | 5374 days | 1% |
| snoopidoops | 9/10 | 5407 days | 1% |
| Waldemar Schuler | 9/10 | 5454 days | 1% |
| Lardy | 8/10 | 5455 days | 1% |
| R & M Willows | 9/10 | 5455 days | 1% |
| Amelia Tan-MaKhmalchi | 10/10 | 5499 days | 1% |
| james11 | 9/10 | 5499 days | 1% |
| kelvin88 | 10/10 | 5499 days | 1% |
| Jon11 | 10/10 | 5499 days | 1% |
| john_seasoned_traveler | 10/10 | 5499 days | 1% |
| de Smedt | 9/10 | 5685 days | 1% |
| Philip Gierke | 7/10 | 5687 days | 1% |
| Knapen | 9/10 | 5693 days | 1% |
| Kuhu | 7/10 | 5697 days | 1% |
| Christian Pflegi | 6/10 | 5701 days | 1% |
| Marianne Wheatley | 10/10 | 5701 days | 1% |
| Wheeler | 7/10 | 5702 days | 1% |
| Nick Tinnemeier | 8/10 | 5703 days | 1% |
| Fam de Kruyf | 8/10 | 5710 days | 1% |
| Fee_MacIntosh | 10/10 | 5713 days | 1% |
| Vincent | 7/10 | 5717 days | 1% |
| Sanne | 8/10 | 5717 days | 1% |
| Erica Moorhouse | 8/10 | 5718 days | 1% |
| mr Schumader | 10/10 | 5727 days | 1% |
| Helene Descamps | 7/10 | 5729 days | 1% |
| Patrick Decoster | 8/10 | 5734 days | 1% |
| Jane Hancock | 9/10 | 5736 days | 1% |
| Nadia Husain | 6/10 | 5741 days | 1% |
| hendrik king | 9/10 | 5772 days | 1% |
| Christof | 10/10 | 6047 days | 1% |
| astridaus | 9/10 | 6047 days | 1% |
| Flora | 9/10 | 6080 days | 1% |
| John Harrison | 10/10 | 6085 days | 1% |
| anon | 7/10 | 6085 days | 1% |
| Pierre Pilon | 9/10 | 6086 days | 1% |
| Peter Koeck | 10/10 | 6087 days | 1% |
| Sebastien Briant | 8/10 | 6105 days | 1% |
| Schubert, Wolfgang & Claudia | 8/10 | 6111 days | 1% |
| Beute Jacob | 7/10 | 6119 days | 1% |
| Family van Hessem | 7/10 | 6126 days | 1% |
| Thomas Signes | 7/10 | 6133 days | 1% |
| kevinp | 7/10 | 6149 days | 1% |
| ilkal | 8/10 | 6154 days | 1% |
| elskeb | 8/10 | 6156 days | 1% |
| Hanne Wichmann | 10/10 | 6172 days | 1% |
| Steffi Marco | 7/10 | 6172 days | 1% |
| Volker Jåkel | 7/10 | 6175 days | 1% |
| MartinG | 8/10 | 6445 days | 1% |
| GillianK | 9/10 | 6447 days | 1% |
| Nick | 8/10 | 6455 days | 1% |
| Nick | 9/10 | 6456 days | 1% |
| Chris | 9/10 | 6461 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
-3.68% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 56 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 200 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 197 | -3.62% |
| 198 | -3.64% |
| 199 | -3.66% |
| 200 | -3.68% |
| 201 | -3.70% |
| 202 | -3.71% |
| 203 | -3.73% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
4.00% 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
81%
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.