Hi, 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
80.95%
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 | 111 days | 49% |
| LH | 7/10 | 139 days | 100% |
| Ana | 2/10 | 170 days | 49% |
| Charlie | 10/10 | 445 days | 96% |
| Morgane | 8/10 | 535 days | 89% |
| Jojo&Skoko | 10/10 | 535 days | 91% |
| Cam an | 3/10 | 566 days | 48% |
| Kc | 9/10 | 566 days | 88% |
| Bobo | 9/10 | 566 days | 88% |
| Emily | 9/10 | 566 days | 88% |
| Nadia | 9/10 | 596 days | 86% |
| Fabienne | 5/10 | 841 days | 49% |
| Jorian | 10/10 | 870 days | 62% |
| Mike Howe | 8/10 | 870 days | 61% |
| Sydney Piskor | 10/10 | 962 days | 52% |
| Anne | 6/10 | 993 days | 42% |
| Henry | 9/10 | 1054 days | 42% |
| Ka Gill | 9/10 | 1146 days | 34% |
| Anne | 9/10 | 1176 days | 31% |
| Helen E | 8/10 | 1207 days | 29% |
| V L Nelson | 9/10 | 1235 days | 27% |
| Inge | 8/10 | 1266 days | 24% |
| Cindi Wight | 10/10 | 1327 days | 21% |
| Annie | 1/10 | 1723 days | 2% |
| Melissa | 10/10 | 1906 days | 5% |
| Jaeneen | 10/10 | 1965 days | 5% |
| Koe | 2/10 | 1996 days | 2% |
| Dan | 7/10 | 2057 days | 5% |
| Paul | 8/10 | 2057 days | 5% |
| Carl Bright | 10/10 | 2180 days | 5% |
| Ashleigh Lim | 10/10 | 2180 days | 5% |
| Linda | 9/10 | 2180 days | 5% |
| Reba | 9/10 | 2302 days | 4% |
| Stefan Hohmann | 10/10 | 2302 days | 4% |
| Peter | 10/10 | 2393 days | 4% |
| Su | 9/10 | 2393 days | 4% |
| Luis Vigil Vidal | 10/10 | 2423 days | 4% |
| Lua | 10/10 | 2423 days | 4% |
| Michal Mazaki | 3/10 | 2454 days | 2% |
| Bites | 9/10 | 2454 days | 4% |
| Chris Plummer | 10/10 | 2454 days | 4% |
| Martinez Whanau | 9/10 | 2546 days | 4% |
| Andy | 3/10 | 2546 days | 2% |
| Paige | 9/10 | 2637 days | 4% |
| Michael | 10/10 | 2637 days | 4% |
| David Hart | 9/10 | 2668 days | 4% |
| Beth | 9/10 | 2668 days | 4% |
| Tash & Laura | 8/10 | 2696 days | 3% |
| Francois & Caroline | 9/10 | 2727 days | 3% |
| Elke fuenfstueck | 6/10 | 2758 days | 3% |
| Rachael Dyson | 9/10 | 2788 days | 3% |
| Grizzly Girl | 9/10 | 2819 days | 3% |
| Ingrid Peters | 10/10 | 2819 days | 3% |
| Kenza | 8/10 | 2819 days | 3% |
| Jennie and kids | 9/10 | 2972 days | 3% |
| Martha Godon | 8/10 | 2972 days | 3% |
| Bradletn | 8/10 | 3002 days | 3% |
| Helene | 9/10 | 3033 days | 3% |
| The Weathersons | 10/10 | 3046 days | 3% |
| Helen Bond | 10/10 | 3061 days | 3% |
| Luis Vigil Vidal | 10/10 | 3075 days | 2% |
| Millka Pietikainen | 10/10 | 3103 days | 3% |
| Ronald Daigneault | 8/10 | 3116 days | 2% |
| Debbie Lesurf | 10/10 | 3130 days | 3% |
| Joe Trigg | 7/10 | 3155 days | 2% |
| Javier Mimbrera | 9/10 | 3214 days | 2% |
| Alexander | 10/10 | 3332 days | 2% |
| Mark Ravenscroft | 10/10 | 3338 days | 2% |
| Roger | 9/10 | 3353 days | 2% |
| Mailhos Cécile | 9/10 | 3401 days | 2% |
| Mark Haydon | 10/10 | 3426 days | 2% |
| Liz K | 10/10 | 3437 days | 2% |
| Erich Brueggermann | 7/10 | 3455 days | 2% |
| Monique Pos | 10/10 | 3478 days | 2% |
| abd malik ahmad | 8/10 | 3488 days | 2% |
| Gary Cohen | 9/10 | 3518 days | 2% |
| S Webb | 9/10 | 3518 days | 2% |
| Greg Mackay | 8/10 | 3579 days | 2% |
| Mikael Torres | 9/10 | 3611 days | 2% |
| Bianca Macri | 10/10 | 3693 days | 1% |
| David Elliott | 10/10 | 3732 days | 1% |
| Susan Woods | 10/10 | 3763 days | 1% |
| Torben Koop | 10/10 | 3766 days | 1% |
| Heather Scoltock | 10/10 | 3788 days | 1% |
| Ian Robb | 10/10 | 3792 days | 1% |
| Michele Johns | 10/10 | 3792 days | 1% |
| Steve Newton | 10/10 | 3792 days | 1% |
| Tine Fook | 9/10 | 3809 days | 1% |
| Paul Read | 9/10 | 3823 days | 1% |
| Sarah Hammond | 8/10 | 3823 days | 1% |
| Pablo Suarez Fernandez | 9/10 | 3823 days | 1% |
| Roel Boorsma | 9/10 | 3841 days | 1% |
| David Walter | 5/10 | 3843 days | 1% |
| Jo Batt | 9/10 | 3858 days | 1% |
| Jamie | 9/10 | 3884 days | 1% |
| Jule & Thomas aus Hamburg Elternzeit 2015 | 5/10 | 3915 days | 1% |
| Suzanne Vermeulen | 7/10 | 3915 days | 1% |
| Denelle Coutts | 9/10 | 3926 days | 1% |
| María del Carmen Escandell | 8/10 | 3953 days | 1% |
| Andreas Knipper | 9/10 | 3969 days | 1% |
| Niall Crosby | 10/10 | 4007 days | 1% |
| Julie Walles | 9/10 | 4007 days | 1% |
| Constantin D | 7/10 | 4161 days | 0% |
| holidaymad from Solihull | 8/10 | 4188 days | 0% |
| John K | 9/10 | 4249 days | 0% |
| Mark Fisher | 8/10 | 4249 days | 0% |
| GN100 | 8/10 | 4280 days | 0% |
| Daniel Capener | 7/10 | 4372 days | 0% |
| tim winders | 9/10 | 4402 days | 1% |
| Leonie Moeller | 9/10 | 4472 days | 1% |
| Gillian Scott | 9/10 | 4492 days | 1% |
| Janina Zwerver | 9/10 | 4496 days | 1% |
| Rita Hochstiasser | 9/10 | 4519 days | 1% |
| Matthias Freiling | 7/10 | 4520 days | 1% |
| Johannes | 8/10 | 4521 days | 1% |
| Bert Snel | 9/10 | 4553 days | 1% |
| kiwifamily2 | 8/10 | 4553 days | 1% |
| David Restell | 9/10 | 4737 days | 1% |
| David Lee | 8/10 | 4871 days | 1% |
| Christopher Saunders | 7/10 | 4901 days | 1% |
| Henrik Steinruecken | 7/10 | 4931 days | 1% |
| Ramon Keller | 10/10 | 4939 days | 1% |
| Anne Kerpershoek | 8/10 | 4941 days | 1% |
| Camille Gerjat | 7/10 | 4954 days | 1% |
| Faassen | 5/10 | 4957 days | 1% |
| Fam von Hattem | 7/10 | 4961 days | 1% |
| sueadegizmo | 10/10 | 5132 days | 1% |
| Mark Westebring | 9/10 | 5211 days | 1% |
| Be Groen | 8/10 | 5216 days | 1% |
| Daniel & Manuela | 8/10 | 5230 days | 1% |
| Graham Platt | 8/10 | 5233 days | 1% |
| Lars | 9/10 | 5233 days | 1% |
| Michael Stoll | 8/10 | 5234 days | 1% |
| Moritz | 9/10 | 5237 days | 1% |
| Dominique | 8/10 | 5237 days | 1% |
| Charlotte | 7/10 | 5239 days | 1% |
| Hardy | 9/10 | 5239 days | 1% |
| Marjolein Hartsuiker | 8/10 | 5239 days | 1% |
| Corv V D Hof | 7/10 | 5250 days | 1% |
| Guillaume Milcent | 7/10 | 5250 days | 1% |
| Lotte Foged | 8/10 | 5251 days | 1% |
| snoopidoops | 9/10 | 5284 days | 1% |
| Waldemar Schuler | 9/10 | 5331 days | 1% |
| Lardy | 8/10 | 5332 days | 1% |
| R & M Willows | 9/10 | 5332 days | 1% |
| Amelia Tan-MaKhmalchi | 10/10 | 5376 days | 1% |
| james11 | 9/10 | 5376 days | 1% |
| kelvin88 | 10/10 | 5376 days | 1% |
| Jon11 | 10/10 | 5376 days | 1% |
| john_seasoned_traveler | 10/10 | 5376 days | 1% |
| de Smedt | 9/10 | 5562 days | 1% |
| Philip Gierke | 7/10 | 5564 days | 1% |
| Knapen | 9/10 | 5570 days | 1% |
| Kuhu | 7/10 | 5574 days | 1% |
| Christian Pflegi | 6/10 | 5578 days | 1% |
| Marianne Wheatley | 10/10 | 5578 days | 1% |
| Wheeler | 7/10 | 5579 days | 1% |
| Nick Tinnemeier | 8/10 | 5580 days | 1% |
| Fam de Kruyf | 8/10 | 5587 days | 1% |
| Fee_MacIntosh | 10/10 | 5590 days | 1% |
| Vincent | 7/10 | 5594 days | 1% |
| Sanne | 8/10 | 5594 days | 1% |
| Erica Moorhouse | 8/10 | 5595 days | 1% |
| mr Schumader | 10/10 | 5604 days | 1% |
| Helene Descamps | 7/10 | 5606 days | 1% |
| Patrick Decoster | 8/10 | 5611 days | 1% |
| Jane Hancock | 9/10 | 5613 days | 1% |
| Nadia Husain | 6/10 | 5618 days | 1% |
| hendrik king | 9/10 | 5649 days | 1% |
| Christof | 10/10 | 5924 days | 1% |
| astridaus | 9/10 | 5924 days | 1% |
| Flora | 9/10 | 5957 days | 1% |
| John Harrison | 10/10 | 5962 days | 1% |
| anon | 7/10 | 5962 days | 1% |
| Pierre Pilon | 9/10 | 5963 days | 1% |
| Peter Koeck | 10/10 | 5964 days | 1% |
| Sebastien Briant | 8/10 | 5982 days | 1% |
| Schubert, Wolfgang & Claudia | 8/10 | 5988 days | 1% |
| Beute Jacob | 7/10 | 5996 days | 1% |
| Family van Hessem | 7/10 | 6003 days | 1% |
| Thomas Signes | 7/10 | 6010 days | 1% |
| kevinp | 7/10 | 6026 days | 1% |
| ilkal | 8/10 | 6031 days | 1% |
| elskeb | 8/10 | 6033 days | 1% |
| Hanne Wichmann | 10/10 | 6049 days | 1% |
| Steffi Marco | 7/10 | 6049 days | 1% |
| Volker Jåkel | 7/10 | 6052 days | 1% |
| MartinG | 8/10 | 6322 days | 1% |
| GillianK | 9/10 | 6324 days | 1% |
| Nick | 8/10 | 6332 days | 1% |
| Nick | 9/10 | 6333 days | 1% |
| Chris | 9/10 | 6338 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
-0.86% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 118 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 80 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 77 | -0.83% |
| 78 | -0.84% |
| 79 | -0.85% |
| 80 | -0.86% |
| 81 | -0.87% |
| 82 | -0.88% |
| 83 | -0.89% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
2.97% 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.