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
81.10%
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 | 71 days | 49% |
| LH | 7/10 | 99 days | 100% |
| Ana | 2/10 | 130 days | 49% |
| Charlie | 10/10 | 405 days | 98% |
| Morgane | 8/10 | 495 days | 91% |
| Jojo&Skoko | 10/10 | 495 days | 93% |
| Cam an | 3/10 | 526 days | 50% |
| Kc | 9/10 | 526 days | 90% |
| Bobo | 9/10 | 526 days | 90% |
| Emily | 9/10 | 526 days | 90% |
| Nadia | 9/10 | 556 days | 88% |
| Fabienne | 5/10 | 801 days | 52% |
| Jorian | 10/10 | 830 days | 66% |
| Mike Howe | 8/10 | 830 days | 64% |
| Sydney Piskor | 10/10 | 922 days | 56% |
| Anne | 6/10 | 953 days | 45% |
| Henry | 9/10 | 1014 days | 45% |
| Ka Gill | 9/10 | 1106 days | 37% |
| Anne | 9/10 | 1136 days | 34% |
| Helen E | 8/10 | 1167 days | 31% |
| V L Nelson | 9/10 | 1195 days | 30% |
| Inge | 8/10 | 1226 days | 27% |
| Cindi Wight | 10/10 | 1287 days | 23% |
| Annie | 1/10 | 1683 days | 3% |
| Melissa | 10/10 | 1866 days | 5% |
| Jaeneen | 10/10 | 1925 days | 5% |
| Koe | 2/10 | 1956 days | 2% |
| Dan | 7/10 | 2017 days | 5% |
| Paul | 8/10 | 2017 days | 5% |
| Carl Bright | 10/10 | 2140 days | 5% |
| Ashleigh Lim | 10/10 | 2140 days | 5% |
| Linda | 9/10 | 2140 days | 5% |
| Reba | 9/10 | 2262 days | 4% |
| Stefan Hohmann | 10/10 | 2262 days | 4% |
| Peter | 10/10 | 2353 days | 4% |
| Su | 9/10 | 2353 days | 4% |
| Luis Vigil Vidal | 10/10 | 2383 days | 4% |
| Lua | 10/10 | 2383 days | 4% |
| Michal Mazaki | 3/10 | 2414 days | 2% |
| Bites | 9/10 | 2414 days | 4% |
| Chris Plummer | 10/10 | 2414 days | 4% |
| Martinez Whanau | 9/10 | 2506 days | 4% |
| Andy | 3/10 | 2506 days | 2% |
| Paige | 9/10 | 2597 days | 4% |
| Michael | 10/10 | 2597 days | 4% |
| David Hart | 9/10 | 2628 days | 4% |
| Beth | 9/10 | 2628 days | 4% |
| Tash & Laura | 8/10 | 2656 days | 4% |
| Francois & Caroline | 9/10 | 2687 days | 4% |
| Elke fuenfstueck | 6/10 | 2718 days | 3% |
| Rachael Dyson | 9/10 | 2748 days | 3% |
| Grizzly Girl | 9/10 | 2779 days | 3% |
| Ingrid Peters | 10/10 | 2779 days | 3% |
| Kenza | 8/10 | 2779 days | 3% |
| Jennie and kids | 9/10 | 2932 days | 3% |
| Martha Godon | 8/10 | 2932 days | 3% |
| Bradletn | 8/10 | 2962 days | 3% |
| Helene | 9/10 | 2993 days | 3% |
| The Weathersons | 10/10 | 3006 days | 3% |
| Helen Bond | 10/10 | 3021 days | 3% |
| Luis Vigil Vidal | 10/10 | 3035 days | 3% |
| Millka Pietikainen | 10/10 | 3063 days | 3% |
| Ronald Daigneault | 8/10 | 3076 days | 2% |
| Debbie Lesurf | 10/10 | 3090 days | 3% |
| Joe Trigg | 7/10 | 3115 days | 2% |
| Javier Mimbrera | 9/10 | 3174 days | 2% |
| Alexander | 10/10 | 3292 days | 2% |
| Mark Ravenscroft | 10/10 | 3298 days | 2% |
| Roger | 9/10 | 3313 days | 2% |
| Mailhos Cécile | 9/10 | 3361 days | 2% |
| Mark Haydon | 10/10 | 3386 days | 2% |
| Liz K | 10/10 | 3397 days | 2% |
| Erich Brueggermann | 7/10 | 3415 days | 2% |
| Monique Pos | 10/10 | 3438 days | 2% |
| abd malik ahmad | 8/10 | 3448 days | 2% |
| Gary Cohen | 9/10 | 3478 days | 2% |
| S Webb | 9/10 | 3478 days | 2% |
| Greg Mackay | 8/10 | 3539 days | 2% |
| Mikael Torres | 9/10 | 3571 days | 2% |
| Bianca Macri | 10/10 | 3653 days | 2% |
| David Elliott | 10/10 | 3692 days | 1% |
| Susan Woods | 10/10 | 3723 days | 1% |
| Torben Koop | 10/10 | 3726 days | 1% |
| Heather Scoltock | 10/10 | 3748 days | 1% |
| Ian Robb | 10/10 | 3752 days | 1% |
| Michele Johns | 10/10 | 3752 days | 1% |
| Steve Newton | 10/10 | 3752 days | 1% |
| Tine Fook | 9/10 | 3769 days | 1% |
| Paul Read | 9/10 | 3783 days | 1% |
| Sarah Hammond | 8/10 | 3783 days | 1% |
| Pablo Suarez Fernandez | 9/10 | 3783 days | 1% |
| Roel Boorsma | 9/10 | 3801 days | 1% |
| David Walter | 5/10 | 3803 days | 1% |
| Jo Batt | 9/10 | 3818 days | 1% |
| Jamie | 9/10 | 3844 days | 1% |
| Jule & Thomas aus Hamburg Elternzeit 2015 | 5/10 | 3875 days | 1% |
| Suzanne Vermeulen | 7/10 | 3875 days | 1% |
| Denelle Coutts | 9/10 | 3886 days | 1% |
| María del Carmen Escandell | 8/10 | 3913 days | 1% |
| Andreas Knipper | 9/10 | 3929 days | 1% |
| Niall Crosby | 10/10 | 3967 days | 1% |
| Julie Walles | 9/10 | 3967 days | 1% |
| Constantin D | 7/10 | 4121 days | 0% |
| holidaymad from Solihull | 8/10 | 4148 days | 0% |
| John K | 9/10 | 4209 days | 0% |
| Mark Fisher | 8/10 | 4209 days | 0% |
| GN100 | 8/10 | 4240 days | 0% |
| Daniel Capener | 7/10 | 4332 days | 0% |
| tim winders | 9/10 | 4362 days | 0% |
| Leonie Moeller | 9/10 | 4432 days | 1% |
| Gillian Scott | 9/10 | 4452 days | 1% |
| Janina Zwerver | 9/10 | 4456 days | 1% |
| Rita Hochstiasser | 9/10 | 4479 days | 1% |
| Matthias Freiling | 7/10 | 4480 days | 1% |
| Johannes | 8/10 | 4481 days | 1% |
| Bert Snel | 9/10 | 4513 days | 1% |
| kiwifamily2 | 8/10 | 4513 days | 1% |
| David Restell | 9/10 | 4697 days | 1% |
| David Lee | 8/10 | 4831 days | 1% |
| Christopher Saunders | 7/10 | 4861 days | 1% |
| Henrik Steinruecken | 7/10 | 4891 days | 1% |
| Ramon Keller | 10/10 | 4899 days | 1% |
| Anne Kerpershoek | 8/10 | 4901 days | 1% |
| Camille Gerjat | 7/10 | 4914 days | 1% |
| Faassen | 5/10 | 4917 days | 1% |
| Fam von Hattem | 7/10 | 4921 days | 1% |
| sueadegizmo | 10/10 | 5092 days | 1% |
| Mark Westebring | 9/10 | 5171 days | 1% |
| Be Groen | 8/10 | 5176 days | 1% |
| Daniel & Manuela | 8/10 | 5190 days | 1% |
| Graham Platt | 8/10 | 5193 days | 1% |
| Lars | 9/10 | 5193 days | 1% |
| Michael Stoll | 8/10 | 5194 days | 1% |
| Moritz | 9/10 | 5197 days | 1% |
| Dominique | 8/10 | 5197 days | 1% |
| Charlotte | 7/10 | 5199 days | 1% |
| Hardy | 9/10 | 5199 days | 1% |
| Marjolein Hartsuiker | 8/10 | 5199 days | 1% |
| Corv V D Hof | 7/10 | 5210 days | 1% |
| Guillaume Milcent | 7/10 | 5210 days | 1% |
| Lotte Foged | 8/10 | 5211 days | 1% |
| snoopidoops | 9/10 | 5244 days | 1% |
| Waldemar Schuler | 9/10 | 5291 days | 1% |
| Lardy | 8/10 | 5292 days | 1% |
| R & M Willows | 9/10 | 5292 days | 1% |
| Amelia Tan-MaKhmalchi | 10/10 | 5336 days | 1% |
| james11 | 9/10 | 5336 days | 1% |
| kelvin88 | 10/10 | 5336 days | 1% |
| Jon11 | 10/10 | 5336 days | 1% |
| john_seasoned_traveler | 10/10 | 5336 days | 1% |
| de Smedt | 9/10 | 5522 days | 1% |
| Philip Gierke | 7/10 | 5524 days | 1% |
| Knapen | 9/10 | 5530 days | 1% |
| Kuhu | 7/10 | 5534 days | 1% |
| Christian Pflegi | 6/10 | 5538 days | 1% |
| Marianne Wheatley | 10/10 | 5538 days | 1% |
| Wheeler | 7/10 | 5539 days | 1% |
| Nick Tinnemeier | 8/10 | 5540 days | 1% |
| Fam de Kruyf | 8/10 | 5547 days | 1% |
| Fee_MacIntosh | 10/10 | 5550 days | 1% |
| Vincent | 7/10 | 5554 days | 1% |
| Sanne | 8/10 | 5554 days | 1% |
| Erica Moorhouse | 8/10 | 5555 days | 1% |
| mr Schumader | 10/10 | 5564 days | 1% |
| Helene Descamps | 7/10 | 5566 days | 1% |
| Patrick Decoster | 8/10 | 5571 days | 1% |
| Jane Hancock | 9/10 | 5573 days | 1% |
| Nadia Husain | 6/10 | 5578 days | 1% |
| hendrik king | 9/10 | 5609 days | 1% |
| Christof | 10/10 | 5884 days | 1% |
| astridaus | 9/10 | 5884 days | 1% |
| Flora | 9/10 | 5917 days | 1% |
| John Harrison | 10/10 | 5922 days | 1% |
| anon | 7/10 | 5922 days | 1% |
| Pierre Pilon | 9/10 | 5923 days | 1% |
| Peter Koeck | 10/10 | 5924 days | 1% |
| Sebastien Briant | 8/10 | 5942 days | 1% |
| Schubert, Wolfgang & Claudia | 8/10 | 5948 days | 1% |
| Beute Jacob | 7/10 | 5956 days | 1% |
| Family van Hessem | 7/10 | 5963 days | 1% |
| Thomas Signes | 7/10 | 5970 days | 1% |
| kevinp | 7/10 | 5986 days | 1% |
| ilkal | 8/10 | 5991 days | 1% |
| elskeb | 8/10 | 5993 days | 1% |
| Hanne Wichmann | 10/10 | 6009 days | 1% |
| Steffi Marco | 7/10 | 6009 days | 1% |
| Volker Jåkel | 7/10 | 6012 days | 1% |
| MartinG | 8/10 | 6282 days | 1% |
| GillianK | 9/10 | 6284 days | 1% |
| Nick | 8/10 | 6292 days | 1% |
| Nick | 9/10 | 6293 days | 1% |
| Chris | 9/10 | 6298 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
-0.58% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 87 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 40 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 37 | -0.53% |
| 38 | -0.55% |
| 39 | -0.56% |
| 40 | -0.58% |
| 41 | -0.59% |
| 42 | -0.61% |
| 43 | -0.62% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
2.86% 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.