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
81.03%
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 | 92 days | 49% |
| LH | 7/10 | 120 days | 100% |
| Ana | 2/10 | 151 days | 49% |
| Charlie | 10/10 | 426 days | 97% |
| Morgane | 8/10 | 516 days | 90% |
| Jojo&Skoko | 10/10 | 516 days | 92% |
| Cam an | 3/10 | 547 days | 49% |
| Kc | 9/10 | 547 days | 89% |
| Bobo | 9/10 | 547 days | 89% |
| Emily | 9/10 | 547 days | 89% |
| Nadia | 9/10 | 577 days | 87% |
| Fabienne | 5/10 | 822 days | 51% |
| Jorian | 10/10 | 851 days | 64% |
| Mike Howe | 8/10 | 851 days | 62% |
| Sydney Piskor | 10/10 | 943 days | 53% |
| Anne | 6/10 | 974 days | 43% |
| Henry | 9/10 | 1035 days | 44% |
| Ka Gill | 9/10 | 1127 days | 35% |
| Anne | 9/10 | 1157 days | 33% |
| Helen E | 8/10 | 1188 days | 30% |
| V L Nelson | 9/10 | 1216 days | 28% |
| Inge | 8/10 | 1247 days | 26% |
| Cindi Wight | 10/10 | 1308 days | 22% |
| Annie | 1/10 | 1704 days | 3% |
| Melissa | 10/10 | 1887 days | 5% |
| Jaeneen | 10/10 | 1946 days | 5% |
| Koe | 2/10 | 1977 days | 2% |
| Dan | 7/10 | 2038 days | 5% |
| Paul | 8/10 | 2038 days | 5% |
| Carl Bright | 10/10 | 2161 days | 5% |
| Ashleigh Lim | 10/10 | 2161 days | 5% |
| Linda | 9/10 | 2161 days | 5% |
| Reba | 9/10 | 2283 days | 4% |
| Stefan Hohmann | 10/10 | 2283 days | 4% |
| Peter | 10/10 | 2374 days | 4% |
| Su | 9/10 | 2374 days | 4% |
| Luis Vigil Vidal | 10/10 | 2404 days | 4% |
| Lua | 10/10 | 2404 days | 4% |
| Michal Mazaki | 3/10 | 2435 days | 2% |
| Bites | 9/10 | 2435 days | 4% |
| Chris Plummer | 10/10 | 2435 days | 4% |
| Martinez Whanau | 9/10 | 2527 days | 4% |
| Andy | 3/10 | 2527 days | 2% |
| Paige | 9/10 | 2618 days | 4% |
| Michael | 10/10 | 2618 days | 4% |
| David Hart | 9/10 | 2649 days | 4% |
| Beth | 9/10 | 2649 days | 4% |
| Tash & Laura | 8/10 | 2677 days | 3% |
| Francois & Caroline | 9/10 | 2708 days | 3% |
| Elke fuenfstueck | 6/10 | 2739 days | 3% |
| Rachael Dyson | 9/10 | 2768 days | 3% |
| Grizzly Girl | 9/10 | 2800 days | 3% |
| Ingrid Peters | 10/10 | 2800 days | 3% |
| Kenza | 8/10 | 2800 days | 3% |
| Jennie and kids | 9/10 | 2953 days | 3% |
| Martha Godon | 8/10 | 2953 days | 3% |
| Bradletn | 8/10 | 2983 days | 3% |
| Helene | 9/10 | 3014 days | 3% |
| The Weathersons | 10/10 | 3027 days | 3% |
| Helen Bond | 10/10 | 3042 days | 3% |
| Luis Vigil Vidal | 10/10 | 3056 days | 2% |
| Millka Pietikainen | 10/10 | 3084 days | 3% |
| Ronald Daigneault | 8/10 | 3097 days | 2% |
| Debbie Lesurf | 10/10 | 3111 days | 3% |
| Joe Trigg | 7/10 | 3136 days | 2% |
| Javier Mimbrera | 9/10 | 3194 days | 2% |
| Alexander | 10/10 | 3313 days | 2% |
| Mark Ravenscroft | 10/10 | 3319 days | 2% |
| Roger | 9/10 | 3334 days | 2% |
| Mailhos Cécile | 9/10 | 3382 days | 2% |
| Mark Haydon | 10/10 | 3406 days | 2% |
| Liz K | 10/10 | 3418 days | 2% |
| Erich Brueggermann | 7/10 | 3436 days | 2% |
| Monique Pos | 10/10 | 3459 days | 2% |
| abd malik ahmad | 8/10 | 3468 days | 2% |
| Gary Cohen | 9/10 | 3498 days | 2% |
| S Webb | 9/10 | 3498 days | 2% |
| Greg Mackay | 8/10 | 3559 days | 2% |
| Mikael Torres | 9/10 | 3592 days | 2% |
| Bianca Macri | 10/10 | 3674 days | 1% |
| David Elliott | 10/10 | 3712 days | 1% |
| Susan Woods | 10/10 | 3743 days | 1% |
| Torben Koop | 10/10 | 3747 days | 1% |
| Heather Scoltock | 10/10 | 3769 days | 1% |
| Ian Robb | 10/10 | 3772 days | 1% |
| Michele Johns | 10/10 | 3772 days | 1% |
| Steve Newton | 10/10 | 3773 days | 1% |
| Tine Fook | 9/10 | 3790 days | 1% |
| Paul Read | 9/10 | 3803 days | 1% |
| Sarah Hammond | 8/10 | 3803 days | 1% |
| Pablo Suarez Fernandez | 9/10 | 3804 days | 1% |
| Roel Boorsma | 9/10 | 3822 days | 1% |
| David Walter | 5/10 | 3824 days | 1% |
| Jo Batt | 9/10 | 3839 days | 1% |
| Jamie | 9/10 | 3864 days | 1% |
| Jule & Thomas aus Hamburg Elternzeit 2015 | 5/10 | 3895 days | 1% |
| Suzanne Vermeulen | 7/10 | 3896 days | 1% |
| Denelle Coutts | 9/10 | 3907 days | 1% |
| María del Carmen Escandell | 8/10 | 3934 days | 1% |
| Andreas Knipper | 9/10 | 3950 days | 1% |
| Niall Crosby | 10/10 | 3987 days | 1% |
| Julie Walles | 9/10 | 3987 days | 1% |
| Constantin D | 7/10 | 4142 days | 0% |
| holidaymad from Solihull | 8/10 | 4168 days | 0% |
| John K | 9/10 | 4229 days | 0% |
| Mark Fisher | 8/10 | 4229 days | 0% |
| GN100 | 8/10 | 4260 days | 0% |
| Daniel Capener | 7/10 | 4353 days | 0% |
| tim winders | 9/10 | 4383 days | 1% |
| Leonie Moeller | 9/10 | 4453 days | 1% |
| Gillian Scott | 9/10 | 4473 days | 1% |
| Janina Zwerver | 9/10 | 4477 days | 1% |
| Rita Hochstiasser | 9/10 | 4500 days | 1% |
| Matthias Freiling | 7/10 | 4501 days | 1% |
| Johannes | 8/10 | 4502 days | 1% |
| Bert Snel | 9/10 | 4533 days | 1% |
| kiwifamily2 | 8/10 | 4534 days | 1% |
| David Restell | 9/10 | 4718 days | 1% |
| David Lee | 8/10 | 4852 days | 1% |
| Christopher Saunders | 7/10 | 4882 days | 1% |
| Henrik Steinruecken | 7/10 | 4912 days | 1% |
| Ramon Keller | 10/10 | 4920 days | 1% |
| Anne Kerpershoek | 8/10 | 4922 days | 1% |
| Camille Gerjat | 7/10 | 4935 days | 1% |
| Faassen | 5/10 | 4938 days | 1% |
| Fam von Hattem | 7/10 | 4942 days | 1% |
| sueadegizmo | 10/10 | 5113 days | 1% |
| Mark Westebring | 9/10 | 5192 days | 1% |
| Be Groen | 8/10 | 5197 days | 1% |
| Daniel & Manuela | 8/10 | 5211 days | 1% |
| Graham Platt | 8/10 | 5214 days | 1% |
| Lars | 9/10 | 5214 days | 1% |
| Michael Stoll | 8/10 | 5215 days | 1% |
| Moritz | 9/10 | 5218 days | 1% |
| Dominique | 8/10 | 5218 days | 1% |
| Charlotte | 7/10 | 5220 days | 1% |
| Hardy | 9/10 | 5220 days | 1% |
| Marjolein Hartsuiker | 8/10 | 5220 days | 1% |
| Corv V D Hof | 7/10 | 5231 days | 1% |
| Guillaume Milcent | 7/10 | 5231 days | 1% |
| Lotte Foged | 8/10 | 5232 days | 1% |
| snoopidoops | 9/10 | 5265 days | 1% |
| Waldemar Schuler | 9/10 | 5312 days | 1% |
| Lardy | 8/10 | 5313 days | 1% |
| R & M Willows | 9/10 | 5313 days | 1% |
| Amelia Tan-MaKhmalchi | 10/10 | 5357 days | 1% |
| james11 | 9/10 | 5357 days | 1% |
| kelvin88 | 10/10 | 5357 days | 1% |
| Jon11 | 10/10 | 5357 days | 1% |
| john_seasoned_traveler | 10/10 | 5357 days | 1% |
| de Smedt | 9/10 | 5543 days | 1% |
| Philip Gierke | 7/10 | 5545 days | 1% |
| Knapen | 9/10 | 5551 days | 1% |
| Kuhu | 7/10 | 5555 days | 1% |
| Christian Pflegi | 6/10 | 5559 days | 1% |
| Marianne Wheatley | 10/10 | 5559 days | 1% |
| Wheeler | 7/10 | 5560 days | 1% |
| Nick Tinnemeier | 8/10 | 5561 days | 1% |
| Fam de Kruyf | 8/10 | 5568 days | 1% |
| Fee_MacIntosh | 10/10 | 5571 days | 1% |
| Vincent | 7/10 | 5575 days | 1% |
| Sanne | 8/10 | 5575 days | 1% |
| Erica Moorhouse | 8/10 | 5576 days | 1% |
| mr Schumader | 10/10 | 5585 days | 1% |
| Helene Descamps | 7/10 | 5587 days | 1% |
| Patrick Decoster | 8/10 | 5592 days | 1% |
| Jane Hancock | 9/10 | 5594 days | 1% |
| Nadia Husain | 6/10 | 5599 days | 1% |
| hendrik king | 9/10 | 5630 days | 1% |
| Christof | 10/10 | 5905 days | 1% |
| astridaus | 9/10 | 5905 days | 1% |
| Flora | 9/10 | 5938 days | 1% |
| John Harrison | 10/10 | 5943 days | 1% |
| anon | 7/10 | 5943 days | 1% |
| Pierre Pilon | 9/10 | 5944 days | 1% |
| Peter Koeck | 10/10 | 5945 days | 1% |
| Sebastien Briant | 8/10 | 5963 days | 1% |
| Schubert, Wolfgang & Claudia | 8/10 | 5969 days | 1% |
| Beute Jacob | 7/10 | 5977 days | 1% |
| Family van Hessem | 7/10 | 5984 days | 1% |
| Thomas Signes | 7/10 | 5991 days | 1% |
| kevinp | 7/10 | 6007 days | 1% |
| ilkal | 8/10 | 6012 days | 1% |
| elskeb | 8/10 | 6014 days | 1% |
| Hanne Wichmann | 10/10 | 6030 days | 1% |
| Steffi Marco | 7/10 | 6030 days | 1% |
| Volker Jåkel | 7/10 | 6033 days | 1% |
| MartinG | 8/10 | 6303 days | 1% |
| GillianK | 9/10 | 6305 days | 1% |
| Nick | 8/10 | 6313 days | 1% |
| Nick | 9/10 | 6314 days | 1% |
| Chris | 9/10 | 6319 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
-0.75% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 106 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 61 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 58 | -0.71% |
| 59 | -0.72% |
| 60 | -0.74% |
| 61 | -0.75% |
| 62 | -0.76% |
| 63 | -0.77% |
| 64 | -0.78% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
2.92% 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.