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
80.78%
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 | 152 days | 49% |
| LH | 7/10 | 180 days | 100% |
| Ana | 2/10 | 211 days | 49% |
| Charlie | 10/10 | 486 days | 95% |
| Morgane | 8/10 | 576 days | 87% |
| Jojo&Skoko | 10/10 | 576 days | 89% |
| Cam an | 3/10 | 607 days | 47% |
| Kc | 9/10 | 607 days | 86% |
| Bobo | 9/10 | 607 days | 86% |
| Emily | 9/10 | 607 days | 86% |
| Nadia | 9/10 | 637 days | 83% |
| Fabienne | 5/10 | 882 days | 46% |
| Jorian | 10/10 | 911 days | 58% |
| Mike Howe | 8/10 | 911 days | 56% |
| Sydney Piskor | 10/10 | 1003 days | 48% |
| Anne | 6/10 | 1034 days | 38% |
| Henry | 9/10 | 1095 days | 38% |
| Ka Gill | 9/10 | 1187 days | 30% |
| Anne | 9/10 | 1217 days | 28% |
| Helen E | 8/10 | 1248 days | 26% |
| V L Nelson | 9/10 | 1276 days | 24% |
| Inge | 8/10 | 1307 days | 22% |
| Cindi Wight | 10/10 | 1368 days | 18% |
| Annie | 1/10 | 1764 days | 2% |
| Melissa | 10/10 | 1947 days | 5% |
| Jaeneen | 10/10 | 2006 days | 5% |
| Koe | 2/10 | 2037 days | 2% |
| Dan | 7/10 | 2098 days | 4% |
| Paul | 8/10 | 2098 days | 5% |
| Carl Bright | 10/10 | 2221 days | 5% |
| Ashleigh Lim | 10/10 | 2221 days | 5% |
| Linda | 9/10 | 2221 days | 4% |
| Reba | 9/10 | 2343 days | 4% |
| Stefan Hohmann | 10/10 | 2343 days | 4% |
| Peter | 10/10 | 2434 days | 4% |
| Su | 9/10 | 2434 days | 4% |
| Luis Vigil Vidal | 10/10 | 2464 days | 4% |
| Lua | 10/10 | 2464 days | 4% |
| Michal Mazaki | 3/10 | 2495 days | 2% |
| Bites | 9/10 | 2495 days | 4% |
| Chris Plummer | 10/10 | 2495 days | 4% |
| Martinez Whanau | 9/10 | 2587 days | 4% |
| Andy | 3/10 | 2587 days | 2% |
| Paige | 9/10 | 2678 days | 3% |
| Michael | 10/10 | 2678 days | 4% |
| David Hart | 9/10 | 2709 days | 3% |
| Beth | 9/10 | 2709 days | 3% |
| Tash & Laura | 8/10 | 2737 days | 3% |
| Francois & Caroline | 9/10 | 2768 days | 3% |
| Elke fuenfstueck | 6/10 | 2799 days | 3% |
| Rachael Dyson | 9/10 | 2828 days | 3% |
| Grizzly Girl | 9/10 | 2860 days | 3% |
| Ingrid Peters | 10/10 | 2860 days | 3% |
| Kenza | 8/10 | 2860 days | 3% |
| Jennie and kids | 9/10 | 3013 days | 3% |
| Martha Godon | 8/10 | 3013 days | 3% |
| Bradletn | 8/10 | 3043 days | 3% |
| Helene | 9/10 | 3074 days | 3% |
| The Weathersons | 10/10 | 3087 days | 2% |
| Helen Bond | 10/10 | 3102 days | 3% |
| Luis Vigil Vidal | 10/10 | 3116 days | 2% |
| Millka Pietikainen | 10/10 | 3144 days | 3% |
| Ronald Daigneault | 8/10 | 3157 days | 2% |
| Debbie Lesurf | 10/10 | 3171 days | 2% |
| Joe Trigg | 7/10 | 3196 days | 2% |
| Javier Mimbrera | 9/10 | 3254 days | 2% |
| Alexander | 10/10 | 3373 days | 2% |
| Mark Ravenscroft | 10/10 | 3379 days | 2% |
| Roger | 9/10 | 3394 days | 2% |
| Mailhos Cécile | 9/10 | 3442 days | 2% |
| Mark Haydon | 10/10 | 3466 days | 2% |
| Liz K | 10/10 | 3478 days | 2% |
| Erich Brueggermann | 7/10 | 3496 days | 2% |
| Monique Pos | 10/10 | 3519 days | 2% |
| abd malik ahmad | 8/10 | 3528 days | 2% |
| Gary Cohen | 9/10 | 3558 days | 2% |
| S Webb | 9/10 | 3558 days | 2% |
| Greg Mackay | 8/10 | 3619 days | 1% |
| Mikael Torres | 9/10 | 3652 days | 1% |
| Bianca Macri | 10/10 | 3734 days | 1% |
| David Elliott | 10/10 | 3772 days | 1% |
| Susan Woods | 10/10 | 3803 days | 1% |
| Torben Koop | 10/10 | 3807 days | 1% |
| Heather Scoltock | 10/10 | 3829 days | 1% |
| Ian Robb | 10/10 | 3832 days | 1% |
| Michele Johns | 10/10 | 3832 days | 1% |
| Steve Newton | 10/10 | 3833 days | 1% |
| Tine Fook | 9/10 | 3850 days | 1% |
| Paul Read | 9/10 | 3863 days | 1% |
| Sarah Hammond | 8/10 | 3863 days | 1% |
| Pablo Suarez Fernandez | 9/10 | 3864 days | 1% |
| Roel Boorsma | 9/10 | 3882 days | 1% |
| David Walter | 5/10 | 3884 days | 1% |
| Jo Batt | 9/10 | 3899 days | 1% |
| Jamie | 9/10 | 3924 days | 1% |
| Jule & Thomas aus Hamburg Elternzeit 2015 | 5/10 | 3955 days | 1% |
| Suzanne Vermeulen | 7/10 | 3956 days | 1% |
| Denelle Coutts | 9/10 | 3967 days | 1% |
| María del Carmen Escandell | 8/10 | 3994 days | 1% |
| Andreas Knipper | 9/10 | 4010 days | 1% |
| Niall Crosby | 10/10 | 4047 days | 1% |
| Julie Walles | 9/10 | 4047 days | 1% |
| Constantin D | 7/10 | 4202 days | 0% |
| holidaymad from Solihull | 8/10 | 4228 days | 0% |
| John K | 9/10 | 4289 days | 0% |
| Mark Fisher | 8/10 | 4289 days | 0% |
| GN100 | 8/10 | 4320 days | 0% |
| Daniel Capener | 7/10 | 4413 days | 1% |
| tim winders | 9/10 | 4443 days | 1% |
| Leonie Moeller | 9/10 | 4513 days | 1% |
| Gillian Scott | 9/10 | 4533 days | 1% |
| Janina Zwerver | 9/10 | 4537 days | 1% |
| Rita Hochstiasser | 9/10 | 4560 days | 1% |
| Matthias Freiling | 7/10 | 4561 days | 1% |
| Johannes | 8/10 | 4562 days | 1% |
| Bert Snel | 9/10 | 4593 days | 1% |
| kiwifamily2 | 8/10 | 4594 days | 1% |
| David Restell | 9/10 | 4778 days | 1% |
| David Lee | 8/10 | 4912 days | 1% |
| Christopher Saunders | 7/10 | 4942 days | 1% |
| Henrik Steinruecken | 7/10 | 4972 days | 1% |
| Ramon Keller | 10/10 | 4980 days | 1% |
| Anne Kerpershoek | 8/10 | 4982 days | 1% |
| Camille Gerjat | 7/10 | 4995 days | 1% |
| Faassen | 5/10 | 4998 days | 1% |
| Fam von Hattem | 7/10 | 5002 days | 1% |
| sueadegizmo | 10/10 | 5173 days | 1% |
| Mark Westebring | 9/10 | 5252 days | 1% |
| Be Groen | 8/10 | 5257 days | 1% |
| Daniel & Manuela | 8/10 | 5271 days | 1% |
| Graham Platt | 8/10 | 5274 days | 1% |
| Lars | 9/10 | 5274 days | 1% |
| Michael Stoll | 8/10 | 5275 days | 1% |
| Moritz | 9/10 | 5278 days | 1% |
| Dominique | 8/10 | 5278 days | 1% |
| Charlotte | 7/10 | 5280 days | 1% |
| Hardy | 9/10 | 5280 days | 1% |
| Marjolein Hartsuiker | 8/10 | 5280 days | 1% |
| Corv V D Hof | 7/10 | 5291 days | 1% |
| Guillaume Milcent | 7/10 | 5291 days | 1% |
| Lotte Foged | 8/10 | 5292 days | 1% |
| snoopidoops | 9/10 | 5325 days | 1% |
| Waldemar Schuler | 9/10 | 5372 days | 1% |
| Lardy | 8/10 | 5373 days | 1% |
| R & M Willows | 9/10 | 5373 days | 1% |
| Amelia Tan-MaKhmalchi | 10/10 | 5417 days | 1% |
| james11 | 9/10 | 5417 days | 1% |
| kelvin88 | 10/10 | 5417 days | 1% |
| Jon11 | 10/10 | 5417 days | 1% |
| john_seasoned_traveler | 10/10 | 5417 days | 1% |
| de Smedt | 9/10 | 5603 days | 1% |
| Philip Gierke | 7/10 | 5605 days | 1% |
| Knapen | 9/10 | 5611 days | 1% |
| Kuhu | 7/10 | 5615 days | 1% |
| Christian Pflegi | 6/10 | 5619 days | 1% |
| Marianne Wheatley | 10/10 | 5619 days | 1% |
| Wheeler | 7/10 | 5620 days | 1% |
| Nick Tinnemeier | 8/10 | 5621 days | 1% |
| Fam de Kruyf | 8/10 | 5628 days | 1% |
| Fee_MacIntosh | 10/10 | 5631 days | 1% |
| Vincent | 7/10 | 5635 days | 1% |
| Sanne | 8/10 | 5635 days | 1% |
| Erica Moorhouse | 8/10 | 5636 days | 1% |
| mr Schumader | 10/10 | 5645 days | 1% |
| Helene Descamps | 7/10 | 5647 days | 1% |
| Patrick Decoster | 8/10 | 5652 days | 1% |
| Jane Hancock | 9/10 | 5654 days | 1% |
| Nadia Husain | 6/10 | 5659 days | 1% |
| hendrik king | 9/10 | 5690 days | 1% |
| Christof | 10/10 | 5965 days | 1% |
| astridaus | 9/10 | 5965 days | 1% |
| Flora | 9/10 | 5998 days | 1% |
| John Harrison | 10/10 | 6003 days | 1% |
| anon | 7/10 | 6003 days | 1% |
| Pierre Pilon | 9/10 | 6004 days | 1% |
| Peter Koeck | 10/10 | 6005 days | 1% |
| Sebastien Briant | 8/10 | 6023 days | 1% |
| Schubert, Wolfgang & Claudia | 8/10 | 6029 days | 1% |
| Beute Jacob | 7/10 | 6037 days | 1% |
| Family van Hessem | 7/10 | 6044 days | 1% |
| Thomas Signes | 7/10 | 6051 days | 1% |
| kevinp | 7/10 | 6067 days | 1% |
| ilkal | 8/10 | 6072 days | 1% |
| elskeb | 8/10 | 6074 days | 1% |
| Hanne Wichmann | 10/10 | 6090 days | 1% |
| Steffi Marco | 7/10 | 6090 days | 1% |
| Volker Jåkel | 7/10 | 6093 days | 1% |
| MartinG | 8/10 | 6363 days | 1% |
| GillianK | 9/10 | 6365 days | 1% |
| Nick | 8/10 | 6373 days | 1% |
| Nick | 9/10 | 6374 days | 1% |
| Chris | 9/10 | 6379 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
-1.27% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 123 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 121 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 118 | -1.24% |
| 119 | -1.25% |
| 120 | -1.26% |
| 121 | -1.27% |
| 122 | -1.28% |
| 123 | -1.29% |
| 124 | -1.30% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
3.14% 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.