Kia ora, 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
80.86%
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 | 132 days | 49% |
| LH | 7/10 | 160 days | 100% |
| Ana | 2/10 | 191 days | 49% |
| Charlie | 10/10 | 466 days | 96% |
| Morgane | 8/10 | 556 days | 88% |
| Jojo&Skoko | 10/10 | 556 days | 90% |
| Cam an | 3/10 | 587 days | 48% |
| Kc | 9/10 | 587 days | 87% |
| Bobo | 9/10 | 587 days | 87% |
| Emily | 9/10 | 587 days | 87% |
| Nadia | 9/10 | 617 days | 84% |
| Fabienne | 5/10 | 862 days | 48% |
| Jorian | 10/10 | 891 days | 60% |
| Mike Howe | 8/10 | 891 days | 58% |
| Sydney Piskor | 10/10 | 983 days | 49% |
| Anne | 6/10 | 1014 days | 40% |
| Henry | 9/10 | 1075 days | 40% |
| Ka Gill | 9/10 | 1167 days | 32% |
| Anne | 9/10 | 1197 days | 30% |
| Helen E | 8/10 | 1228 days | 27% |
| V L Nelson | 9/10 | 1256 days | 25% |
| Inge | 8/10 | 1287 days | 23% |
| Cindi Wight | 10/10 | 1348 days | 19% |
| Annie | 1/10 | 1744 days | 2% |
| Melissa | 10/10 | 1927 days | 5% |
| Jaeneen | 10/10 | 1986 days | 5% |
| Koe | 2/10 | 2017 days | 2% |
| Dan | 7/10 | 2078 days | 4% |
| Paul | 8/10 | 2078 days | 5% |
| Carl Bright | 10/10 | 2201 days | 4% |
| Ashleigh Lim | 10/10 | 2201 days | 4% |
| Linda | 9/10 | 2201 days | 4% |
| Reba | 9/10 | 2323 days | 4% |
| Stefan Hohmann | 10/10 | 2323 days | 4% |
| Peter | 10/10 | 2414 days | 4% |
| Su | 9/10 | 2414 days | 4% |
| Luis Vigil Vidal | 10/10 | 2444 days | 4% |
| Lua | 10/10 | 2444 days | 4% |
| Michal Mazaki | 3/10 | 2475 days | 2% |
| Bites | 9/10 | 2475 days | 4% |
| Chris Plummer | 10/10 | 2475 days | 4% |
| Martinez Whanau | 9/10 | 2567 days | 4% |
| Andy | 3/10 | 2567 days | 2% |
| Paige | 9/10 | 2658 days | 3% |
| Michael | 10/10 | 2658 days | 4% |
| David Hart | 9/10 | 2689 days | 3% |
| Beth | 9/10 | 2689 days | 3% |
| Tash & Laura | 8/10 | 2717 days | 3% |
| Francois & Caroline | 9/10 | 2748 days | 3% |
| Elke fuenfstueck | 6/10 | 2779 days | 3% |
| Rachael Dyson | 9/10 | 2808 days | 3% |
| Grizzly Girl | 9/10 | 2840 days | 3% |
| Ingrid Peters | 10/10 | 2840 days | 3% |
| Kenza | 8/10 | 2840 days | 3% |
| Jennie and kids | 9/10 | 2993 days | 3% |
| Martha Godon | 8/10 | 2993 days | 3% |
| Bradletn | 8/10 | 3023 days | 3% |
| Helene | 9/10 | 3054 days | 3% |
| The Weathersons | 10/10 | 3067 days | 2% |
| Helen Bond | 10/10 | 3082 days | 3% |
| Luis Vigil Vidal | 10/10 | 3096 days | 2% |
| Millka Pietikainen | 10/10 | 3124 days | 3% |
| Ronald Daigneault | 8/10 | 3137 days | 2% |
| Debbie Lesurf | 10/10 | 3151 days | 2% |
| Joe Trigg | 7/10 | 3176 days | 2% |
| Javier Mimbrera | 9/10 | 3234 days | 2% |
| Alexander | 10/10 | 3353 days | 2% |
| Mark Ravenscroft | 10/10 | 3359 days | 2% |
| Roger | 9/10 | 3374 days | 2% |
| Mailhos Cécile | 9/10 | 3422 days | 2% |
| Mark Haydon | 10/10 | 3446 days | 2% |
| Liz K | 10/10 | 3458 days | 2% |
| Erich Brueggermann | 7/10 | 3476 days | 2% |
| Monique Pos | 10/10 | 3499 days | 2% |
| abd malik ahmad | 8/10 | 3508 days | 2% |
| Gary Cohen | 9/10 | 3538 days | 2% |
| S Webb | 9/10 | 3538 days | 2% |
| Greg Mackay | 8/10 | 3599 days | 1% |
| Mikael Torres | 9/10 | 3632 days | 1% |
| Bianca Macri | 10/10 | 3714 days | 1% |
| David Elliott | 10/10 | 3752 days | 1% |
| Susan Woods | 10/10 | 3783 days | 1% |
| Torben Koop | 10/10 | 3787 days | 1% |
| Heather Scoltock | 10/10 | 3809 days | 1% |
| Ian Robb | 10/10 | 3812 days | 1% |
| Michele Johns | 10/10 | 3812 days | 1% |
| Steve Newton | 10/10 | 3813 days | 1% |
| Tine Fook | 9/10 | 3830 days | 1% |
| Paul Read | 9/10 | 3843 days | 1% |
| Sarah Hammond | 8/10 | 3843 days | 1% |
| Pablo Suarez Fernandez | 9/10 | 3844 days | 1% |
| Roel Boorsma | 9/10 | 3862 days | 1% |
| David Walter | 5/10 | 3864 days | 1% |
| Jo Batt | 9/10 | 3879 days | 1% |
| Jamie | 9/10 | 3904 days | 1% |
| Jule & Thomas aus Hamburg Elternzeit 2015 | 5/10 | 3935 days | 1% |
| Suzanne Vermeulen | 7/10 | 3936 days | 1% |
| Denelle Coutts | 9/10 | 3947 days | 1% |
| María del Carmen Escandell | 8/10 | 3974 days | 1% |
| Andreas Knipper | 9/10 | 3990 days | 1% |
| Niall Crosby | 10/10 | 4027 days | 1% |
| Julie Walles | 9/10 | 4027 days | 1% |
| Constantin D | 7/10 | 4182 days | 0% |
| holidaymad from Solihull | 8/10 | 4208 days | 0% |
| John K | 9/10 | 4269 days | 0% |
| Mark Fisher | 8/10 | 4269 days | 0% |
| GN100 | 8/10 | 4300 days | 0% |
| Daniel Capener | 7/10 | 4393 days | 1% |
| tim winders | 9/10 | 4423 days | 1% |
| Leonie Moeller | 9/10 | 4493 days | 1% |
| Gillian Scott | 9/10 | 4513 days | 1% |
| Janina Zwerver | 9/10 | 4517 days | 1% |
| Rita Hochstiasser | 9/10 | 4540 days | 1% |
| Matthias Freiling | 7/10 | 4541 days | 1% |
| Johannes | 8/10 | 4542 days | 1% |
| Bert Snel | 9/10 | 4573 days | 1% |
| kiwifamily2 | 8/10 | 4574 days | 1% |
| David Restell | 9/10 | 4758 days | 1% |
| David Lee | 8/10 | 4892 days | 1% |
| Christopher Saunders | 7/10 | 4922 days | 1% |
| Henrik Steinruecken | 7/10 | 4952 days | 1% |
| Ramon Keller | 10/10 | 4960 days | 1% |
| Anne Kerpershoek | 8/10 | 4962 days | 1% |
| Camille Gerjat | 7/10 | 4975 days | 1% |
| Faassen | 5/10 | 4978 days | 1% |
| Fam von Hattem | 7/10 | 4982 days | 1% |
| sueadegizmo | 10/10 | 5153 days | 1% |
| Mark Westebring | 9/10 | 5232 days | 1% |
| Be Groen | 8/10 | 5237 days | 1% |
| Daniel & Manuela | 8/10 | 5251 days | 1% |
| Graham Platt | 8/10 | 5254 days | 1% |
| Lars | 9/10 | 5254 days | 1% |
| Michael Stoll | 8/10 | 5255 days | 1% |
| Moritz | 9/10 | 5258 days | 1% |
| Dominique | 8/10 | 5258 days | 1% |
| Charlotte | 7/10 | 5260 days | 1% |
| Hardy | 9/10 | 5260 days | 1% |
| Marjolein Hartsuiker | 8/10 | 5260 days | 1% |
| Corv V D Hof | 7/10 | 5271 days | 1% |
| Guillaume Milcent | 7/10 | 5271 days | 1% |
| Lotte Foged | 8/10 | 5272 days | 1% |
| snoopidoops | 9/10 | 5305 days | 1% |
| Waldemar Schuler | 9/10 | 5352 days | 1% |
| Lardy | 8/10 | 5353 days | 1% |
| R & M Willows | 9/10 | 5353 days | 1% |
| Amelia Tan-MaKhmalchi | 10/10 | 5397 days | 1% |
| james11 | 9/10 | 5397 days | 1% |
| kelvin88 | 10/10 | 5397 days | 1% |
| Jon11 | 10/10 | 5397 days | 1% |
| john_seasoned_traveler | 10/10 | 5397 days | 1% |
| de Smedt | 9/10 | 5583 days | 1% |
| Philip Gierke | 7/10 | 5585 days | 1% |
| Knapen | 9/10 | 5591 days | 1% |
| Kuhu | 7/10 | 5595 days | 1% |
| Christian Pflegi | 6/10 | 5599 days | 1% |
| Marianne Wheatley | 10/10 | 5599 days | 1% |
| Wheeler | 7/10 | 5600 days | 1% |
| Nick Tinnemeier | 8/10 | 5601 days | 1% |
| Fam de Kruyf | 8/10 | 5608 days | 1% |
| Fee_MacIntosh | 10/10 | 5611 days | 1% |
| Vincent | 7/10 | 5615 days | 1% |
| Sanne | 8/10 | 5615 days | 1% |
| Erica Moorhouse | 8/10 | 5616 days | 1% |
| mr Schumader | 10/10 | 5625 days | 1% |
| Helene Descamps | 7/10 | 5627 days | 1% |
| Patrick Decoster | 8/10 | 5632 days | 1% |
| Jane Hancock | 9/10 | 5634 days | 1% |
| Nadia Husain | 6/10 | 5639 days | 1% |
| hendrik king | 9/10 | 5670 days | 1% |
| Christof | 10/10 | 5945 days | 1% |
| astridaus | 9/10 | 5945 days | 1% |
| Flora | 9/10 | 5978 days | 1% |
| John Harrison | 10/10 | 5983 days | 1% |
| anon | 7/10 | 5983 days | 1% |
| Pierre Pilon | 9/10 | 5984 days | 1% |
| Peter Koeck | 10/10 | 5985 days | 1% |
| Sebastien Briant | 8/10 | 6003 days | 1% |
| Schubert, Wolfgang & Claudia | 8/10 | 6009 days | 1% |
| Beute Jacob | 7/10 | 6017 days | 1% |
| Family van Hessem | 7/10 | 6024 days | 1% |
| Thomas Signes | 7/10 | 6031 days | 1% |
| kevinp | 7/10 | 6047 days | 1% |
| ilkal | 8/10 | 6052 days | 1% |
| elskeb | 8/10 | 6054 days | 1% |
| Hanne Wichmann | 10/10 | 6070 days | 1% |
| Steffi Marco | 7/10 | 6070 days | 1% |
| Volker Jåkel | 7/10 | 6073 days | 1% |
| MartinG | 8/10 | 6343 days | 1% |
| GillianK | 9/10 | 6345 days | 1% |
| Nick | 8/10 | 6353 days | 1% |
| Nick | 9/10 | 6354 days | 1% |
| Chris | 9/10 | 6359 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
-1.01% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 125 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 101 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 98 | -0.98% |
| 99 | -0.99% |
| 100 | -1.00% |
| 101 | -1.01% |
| 102 | -1.02% |
| 103 | -1.03% |
| 104 | -1.04% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
3.04% 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.