Hey, 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
80.71%
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 | 169 days | 49% |
| LH | 7/10 | 197 days | 100% |
| Ana | 2/10 | 228 days | 49% |
| Charlie | 10/10 | 503 days | 94% |
| Morgane | 8/10 | 593 days | 86% |
| Jojo&Skoko | 10/10 | 593 days | 88% |
| Cam an | 3/10 | 624 days | 46% |
| Kc | 9/10 | 624 days | 85% |
| Bobo | 9/10 | 624 days | 85% |
| Emily | 9/10 | 624 days | 85% |
| Nadia | 9/10 | 654 days | 82% |
| Fabienne | 5/10 | 899 days | 45% |
| Jorian | 10/10 | 928 days | 56% |
| Mike Howe | 8/10 | 928 days | 55% |
| Sydney Piskor | 10/10 | 1020 days | 46% |
| Anne | 6/10 | 1051 days | 37% |
| Henry | 9/10 | 1112 days | 37% |
| Ka Gill | 9/10 | 1204 days | 29% |
| Anne | 9/10 | 1234 days | 27% |
| Helen E | 8/10 | 1265 days | 25% |
| V L Nelson | 9/10 | 1293 days | 23% |
| Inge | 8/10 | 1324 days | 21% |
| Cindi Wight | 10/10 | 1385 days | 18% |
| Annie | 1/10 | 1781 days | 2% |
| Melissa | 10/10 | 1964 days | 5% |
| Jaeneen | 10/10 | 2023 days | 5% |
| Koe | 2/10 | 2054 days | 2% |
| Dan | 7/10 | 2115 days | 4% |
| Paul | 8/10 | 2115 days | 5% |
| Carl Bright | 10/10 | 2238 days | 5% |
| Ashleigh Lim | 10/10 | 2238 days | 5% |
| Linda | 9/10 | 2238 days | 4% |
| Reba | 9/10 | 2360 days | 4% |
| Stefan Hohmann | 10/10 | 2360 days | 4% |
| Peter | 10/10 | 2451 days | 4% |
| Su | 9/10 | 2451 days | 4% |
| Luis Vigil Vidal | 10/10 | 2481 days | 4% |
| Lua | 10/10 | 2481 days | 4% |
| Michal Mazaki | 3/10 | 2512 days | 2% |
| Bites | 9/10 | 2512 days | 4% |
| Chris Plummer | 10/10 | 2512 days | 4% |
| Martinez Whanau | 9/10 | 2604 days | 4% |
| Andy | 3/10 | 2604 days | 2% |
| Paige | 9/10 | 2695 days | 3% |
| Michael | 10/10 | 2695 days | 4% |
| David Hart | 9/10 | 2726 days | 3% |
| Beth | 9/10 | 2726 days | 3% |
| Tash & Laura | 8/10 | 2754 days | 3% |
| Francois & Caroline | 9/10 | 2785 days | 3% |
| Elke fuenfstueck | 6/10 | 2816 days | 3% |
| Rachael Dyson | 9/10 | 2845 days | 3% |
| Grizzly Girl | 9/10 | 2877 days | 3% |
| Ingrid Peters | 10/10 | 2877 days | 3% |
| Kenza | 8/10 | 2877 days | 3% |
| Jennie and kids | 9/10 | 3030 days | 3% |
| Martha Godon | 8/10 | 3030 days | 3% |
| Bradletn | 8/10 | 3060 days | 3% |
| Helene | 9/10 | 3091 days | 3% |
| The Weathersons | 10/10 | 3104 days | 2% |
| Helen Bond | 10/10 | 3119 days | 3% |
| Luis Vigil Vidal | 10/10 | 3133 days | 2% |
| Millka Pietikainen | 10/10 | 3161 days | 3% |
| Ronald Daigneault | 8/10 | 3174 days | 2% |
| Debbie Lesurf | 10/10 | 3188 days | 2% |
| Joe Trigg | 7/10 | 3213 days | 2% |
| Javier Mimbrera | 9/10 | 3271 days | 2% |
| Alexander | 10/10 | 3390 days | 2% |
| Mark Ravenscroft | 10/10 | 3396 days | 2% |
| Roger | 9/10 | 3411 days | 2% |
| Mailhos Cécile | 9/10 | 3459 days | 2% |
| Mark Haydon | 10/10 | 3483 days | 2% |
| Liz K | 10/10 | 3495 days | 2% |
| Erich Brueggermann | 7/10 | 3513 days | 2% |
| Monique Pos | 10/10 | 3536 days | 2% |
| abd malik ahmad | 8/10 | 3545 days | 2% |
| Gary Cohen | 9/10 | 3575 days | 2% |
| S Webb | 9/10 | 3575 days | 2% |
| Greg Mackay | 8/10 | 3636 days | 1% |
| Mikael Torres | 9/10 | 3669 days | 1% |
| Bianca Macri | 10/10 | 3751 days | 1% |
| David Elliott | 10/10 | 3789 days | 1% |
| Susan Woods | 10/10 | 3820 days | 1% |
| Torben Koop | 10/10 | 3824 days | 1% |
| Heather Scoltock | 10/10 | 3846 days | 1% |
| Ian Robb | 10/10 | 3849 days | 1% |
| Michele Johns | 10/10 | 3849 days | 1% |
| Steve Newton | 10/10 | 3850 days | 1% |
| Tine Fook | 9/10 | 3867 days | 1% |
| Paul Read | 9/10 | 3880 days | 1% |
| Sarah Hammond | 8/10 | 3880 days | 1% |
| Pablo Suarez Fernandez | 9/10 | 3881 days | 1% |
| Roel Boorsma | 9/10 | 3899 days | 1% |
| David Walter | 5/10 | 3901 days | 1% |
| Jo Batt | 9/10 | 3916 days | 1% |
| Jamie | 9/10 | 3941 days | 1% |
| Jule & Thomas aus Hamburg Elternzeit 2015 | 5/10 | 3972 days | 1% |
| Suzanne Vermeulen | 7/10 | 3973 days | 1% |
| Denelle Coutts | 9/10 | 3984 days | 1% |
| María del Carmen Escandell | 8/10 | 4011 days | 1% |
| Andreas Knipper | 9/10 | 4027 days | 1% |
| Niall Crosby | 10/10 | 4064 days | 1% |
| Julie Walles | 9/10 | 4064 days | 1% |
| Constantin D | 7/10 | 4219 days | 0% |
| holidaymad from Solihull | 8/10 | 4245 days | 0% |
| John K | 9/10 | 4306 days | 0% |
| Mark Fisher | 8/10 | 4306 days | 0% |
| GN100 | 8/10 | 4337 days | 0% |
| Daniel Capener | 7/10 | 4430 days | 1% |
| tim winders | 9/10 | 4460 days | 1% |
| Leonie Moeller | 9/10 | 4530 days | 1% |
| Gillian Scott | 9/10 | 4550 days | 1% |
| Janina Zwerver | 9/10 | 4554 days | 1% |
| Rita Hochstiasser | 9/10 | 4577 days | 1% |
| Matthias Freiling | 7/10 | 4578 days | 1% |
| Johannes | 8/10 | 4579 days | 1% |
| Bert Snel | 9/10 | 4610 days | 1% |
| kiwifamily2 | 8/10 | 4611 days | 1% |
| David Restell | 9/10 | 4795 days | 1% |
| David Lee | 8/10 | 4929 days | 1% |
| Christopher Saunders | 7/10 | 4959 days | 1% |
| Henrik Steinruecken | 7/10 | 4989 days | 1% |
| Ramon Keller | 10/10 | 4997 days | 1% |
| Anne Kerpershoek | 8/10 | 4999 days | 1% |
| Camille Gerjat | 7/10 | 5012 days | 1% |
| Faassen | 5/10 | 5015 days | 1% |
| Fam von Hattem | 7/10 | 5019 days | 1% |
| sueadegizmo | 10/10 | 5190 days | 1% |
| Mark Westebring | 9/10 | 5269 days | 1% |
| Be Groen | 8/10 | 5274 days | 1% |
| Daniel & Manuela | 8/10 | 5288 days | 1% |
| Graham Platt | 8/10 | 5291 days | 1% |
| Lars | 9/10 | 5291 days | 1% |
| Michael Stoll | 8/10 | 5292 days | 1% |
| Moritz | 9/10 | 5295 days | 1% |
| Dominique | 8/10 | 5295 days | 1% |
| Charlotte | 7/10 | 5297 days | 1% |
| Hardy | 9/10 | 5297 days | 1% |
| Marjolein Hartsuiker | 8/10 | 5297 days | 1% |
| Corv V D Hof | 7/10 | 5308 days | 1% |
| Guillaume Milcent | 7/10 | 5308 days | 1% |
| Lotte Foged | 8/10 | 5309 days | 1% |
| snoopidoops | 9/10 | 5342 days | 1% |
| Waldemar Schuler | 9/10 | 5389 days | 1% |
| Lardy | 8/10 | 5390 days | 1% |
| R & M Willows | 9/10 | 5390 days | 1% |
| Amelia Tan-MaKhmalchi | 10/10 | 5434 days | 1% |
| james11 | 9/10 | 5434 days | 1% |
| kelvin88 | 10/10 | 5434 days | 1% |
| Jon11 | 10/10 | 5434 days | 1% |
| john_seasoned_traveler | 10/10 | 5434 days | 1% |
| de Smedt | 9/10 | 5620 days | 1% |
| Philip Gierke | 7/10 | 5622 days | 1% |
| Knapen | 9/10 | 5628 days | 1% |
| Kuhu | 7/10 | 5632 days | 1% |
| Christian Pflegi | 6/10 | 5636 days | 1% |
| Marianne Wheatley | 10/10 | 5636 days | 1% |
| Wheeler | 7/10 | 5637 days | 1% |
| Nick Tinnemeier | 8/10 | 5638 days | 1% |
| Fam de Kruyf | 8/10 | 5645 days | 1% |
| Fee_MacIntosh | 10/10 | 5648 days | 1% |
| Vincent | 7/10 | 5652 days | 1% |
| Sanne | 8/10 | 5652 days | 1% |
| Erica Moorhouse | 8/10 | 5653 days | 1% |
| mr Schumader | 10/10 | 5662 days | 1% |
| Helene Descamps | 7/10 | 5664 days | 1% |
| Patrick Decoster | 8/10 | 5669 days | 1% |
| Jane Hancock | 9/10 | 5671 days | 1% |
| Nadia Husain | 6/10 | 5676 days | 1% |
| hendrik king | 9/10 | 5707 days | 1% |
| Christof | 10/10 | 5982 days | 1% |
| astridaus | 9/10 | 5982 days | 1% |
| Flora | 9/10 | 6015 days | 1% |
| John Harrison | 10/10 | 6020 days | 1% |
| anon | 7/10 | 6020 days | 1% |
| Pierre Pilon | 9/10 | 6021 days | 1% |
| Peter Koeck | 10/10 | 6022 days | 1% |
| Sebastien Briant | 8/10 | 6040 days | 1% |
| Schubert, Wolfgang & Claudia | 8/10 | 6046 days | 1% |
| Beute Jacob | 7/10 | 6054 days | 1% |
| Family van Hessem | 7/10 | 6061 days | 1% |
| Thomas Signes | 7/10 | 6068 days | 1% |
| kevinp | 7/10 | 6084 days | 1% |
| ilkal | 8/10 | 6089 days | 1% |
| elskeb | 8/10 | 6091 days | 1% |
| Hanne Wichmann | 10/10 | 6107 days | 1% |
| Steffi Marco | 7/10 | 6107 days | 1% |
| Volker Jåkel | 7/10 | 6110 days | 1% |
| MartinG | 8/10 | 6380 days | 1% |
| GillianK | 9/10 | 6382 days | 1% |
| Nick | 8/10 | 6390 days | 1% |
| Nick | 9/10 | 6391 days | 1% |
| Chris | 9/10 | 6396 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
-1.61% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 112 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 138 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 135 | -1.57% |
| 136 | -1.58% |
| 137 | -1.59% |
| 138 | -1.61% |
| 139 | -1.62% |
| 140 | -1.63% |
| 141 | -1.64% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
3.25% 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
82%
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.