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
80.70%
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 | 173 days | 49% |
| LH | 7/10 | 201 days | 100% |
| Ana | 2/10 | 232 days | 49% |
| Charlie | 10/10 | 507 days | 94% |
| Morgane | 8/10 | 597 days | 86% |
| Jojo&Skoko | 10/10 | 597 days | 88% |
| Cam an | 3/10 | 628 days | 46% |
| Kc | 9/10 | 628 days | 84% |
| Bobo | 9/10 | 628 days | 84% |
| Emily | 9/10 | 628 days | 84% |
| Nadia | 9/10 | 658 days | 82% |
| Fabienne | 5/10 | 903 days | 45% |
| Jorian | 10/10 | 932 days | 55% |
| Mike Howe | 8/10 | 932 days | 54% |
| Sydney Piskor | 10/10 | 1024 days | 46% |
| Anne | 6/10 | 1055 days | 37% |
| Henry | 9/10 | 1116 days | 37% |
| Ka Gill | 9/10 | 1208 days | 29% |
| Anne | 9/10 | 1238 days | 27% |
| Helen E | 8/10 | 1269 days | 24% |
| V L Nelson | 9/10 | 1297 days | 23% |
| Inge | 8/10 | 1328 days | 21% |
| Cindi Wight | 10/10 | 1389 days | 17% |
| Annie | 1/10 | 1785 days | 2% |
| Melissa | 10/10 | 1968 days | 5% |
| Jaeneen | 10/10 | 2027 days | 5% |
| Koe | 2/10 | 2058 days | 2% |
| Dan | 7/10 | 2119 days | 4% |
| Paul | 8/10 | 2119 days | 5% |
| Carl Bright | 10/10 | 2242 days | 5% |
| Ashleigh Lim | 10/10 | 2242 days | 5% |
| Linda | 9/10 | 2242 days | 4% |
| Reba | 9/10 | 2364 days | 4% |
| Stefan Hohmann | 10/10 | 2364 days | 4% |
| Peter | 10/10 | 2455 days | 4% |
| Su | 9/10 | 2455 days | 4% |
| Luis Vigil Vidal | 10/10 | 2485 days | 4% |
| Lua | 10/10 | 2485 days | 4% |
| Michal Mazaki | 3/10 | 2516 days | 2% |
| Bites | 9/10 | 2516 days | 4% |
| Chris Plummer | 10/10 | 2516 days | 4% |
| Martinez Whanau | 9/10 | 2608 days | 4% |
| Andy | 3/10 | 2608 days | 2% |
| Paige | 9/10 | 2699 days | 4% |
| Michael | 10/10 | 2699 days | 4% |
| David Hart | 9/10 | 2730 days | 3% |
| Beth | 9/10 | 2730 days | 3% |
| Tash & Laura | 8/10 | 2758 days | 3% |
| Francois & Caroline | 9/10 | 2789 days | 3% |
| Elke fuenfstueck | 6/10 | 2820 days | 3% |
| Rachael Dyson | 9/10 | 2849 days | 3% |
| Grizzly Girl | 9/10 | 2881 days | 3% |
| Ingrid Peters | 10/10 | 2881 days | 3% |
| Kenza | 8/10 | 2881 days | 3% |
| Jennie and kids | 9/10 | 3034 days | 3% |
| Martha Godon | 8/10 | 3034 days | 3% |
| Bradletn | 8/10 | 3064 days | 3% |
| Helene | 9/10 | 3095 days | 3% |
| The Weathersons | 10/10 | 3108 days | 2% |
| Helen Bond | 10/10 | 3123 days | 3% |
| Luis Vigil Vidal | 10/10 | 3137 days | 2% |
| Millka Pietikainen | 10/10 | 3165 days | 3% |
| Ronald Daigneault | 8/10 | 3178 days | 2% |
| Debbie Lesurf | 10/10 | 3192 days | 2% |
| Joe Trigg | 7/10 | 3217 days | 2% |
| Javier Mimbrera | 9/10 | 3275 days | 2% |
| Alexander | 10/10 | 3394 days | 2% |
| Mark Ravenscroft | 10/10 | 3400 days | 2% |
| Roger | 9/10 | 3415 days | 2% |
| Mailhos Cécile | 9/10 | 3463 days | 2% |
| Mark Haydon | 10/10 | 3487 days | 2% |
| Liz K | 10/10 | 3499 days | 2% |
| Erich Brueggermann | 7/10 | 3517 days | 2% |
| Monique Pos | 10/10 | 3540 days | 2% |
| abd malik ahmad | 8/10 | 3549 days | 2% |
| Gary Cohen | 9/10 | 3579 days | 2% |
| S Webb | 9/10 | 3579 days | 2% |
| Greg Mackay | 8/10 | 3640 days | 1% |
| Mikael Torres | 9/10 | 3673 days | 1% |
| Bianca Macri | 10/10 | 3755 days | 1% |
| David Elliott | 10/10 | 3793 days | 1% |
| Susan Woods | 10/10 | 3824 days | 1% |
| Torben Koop | 10/10 | 3828 days | 1% |
| Heather Scoltock | 10/10 | 3850 days | 1% |
| Ian Robb | 10/10 | 3853 days | 1% |
| Michele Johns | 10/10 | 3853 days | 1% |
| Steve Newton | 10/10 | 3854 days | 1% |
| Tine Fook | 9/10 | 3871 days | 1% |
| Paul Read | 9/10 | 3884 days | 1% |
| Sarah Hammond | 8/10 | 3884 days | 1% |
| Pablo Suarez Fernandez | 9/10 | 3885 days | 1% |
| Roel Boorsma | 9/10 | 3903 days | 1% |
| David Walter | 5/10 | 3905 days | 1% |
| Jo Batt | 9/10 | 3920 days | 1% |
| Jamie | 9/10 | 3945 days | 1% |
| Jule & Thomas aus Hamburg Elternzeit 2015 | 5/10 | 3976 days | 1% |
| Suzanne Vermeulen | 7/10 | 3977 days | 1% |
| Denelle Coutts | 9/10 | 3988 days | 1% |
| María del Carmen Escandell | 8/10 | 4015 days | 1% |
| Andreas Knipper | 9/10 | 4031 days | 1% |
| Niall Crosby | 10/10 | 4068 days | 1% |
| Julie Walles | 9/10 | 4068 days | 1% |
| Constantin D | 7/10 | 4223 days | 0% |
| holidaymad from Solihull | 8/10 | 4249 days | 0% |
| John K | 9/10 | 4310 days | 0% |
| Mark Fisher | 8/10 | 4310 days | 0% |
| GN100 | 8/10 | 4341 days | 0% |
| Daniel Capener | 7/10 | 4434 days | 1% |
| tim winders | 9/10 | 4464 days | 1% |
| Leonie Moeller | 9/10 | 4534 days | 1% |
| Gillian Scott | 9/10 | 4554 days | 1% |
| Janina Zwerver | 9/10 | 4558 days | 1% |
| Rita Hochstiasser | 9/10 | 4581 days | 1% |
| Matthias Freiling | 7/10 | 4582 days | 1% |
| Johannes | 8/10 | 4583 days | 1% |
| Bert Snel | 9/10 | 4614 days | 1% |
| kiwifamily2 | 8/10 | 4615 days | 1% |
| David Restell | 9/10 | 4799 days | 1% |
| David Lee | 8/10 | 4933 days | 1% |
| Christopher Saunders | 7/10 | 4963 days | 1% |
| Henrik Steinruecken | 7/10 | 4993 days | 1% |
| Ramon Keller | 10/10 | 5001 days | 1% |
| Anne Kerpershoek | 8/10 | 5003 days | 1% |
| Camille Gerjat | 7/10 | 5016 days | 1% |
| Faassen | 5/10 | 5019 days | 1% |
| Fam von Hattem | 7/10 | 5023 days | 1% |
| sueadegizmo | 10/10 | 5194 days | 1% |
| Mark Westebring | 9/10 | 5273 days | 1% |
| Be Groen | 8/10 | 5278 days | 1% |
| Daniel & Manuela | 8/10 | 5292 days | 1% |
| Graham Platt | 8/10 | 5295 days | 1% |
| Lars | 9/10 | 5295 days | 1% |
| Michael Stoll | 8/10 | 5296 days | 1% |
| Moritz | 9/10 | 5299 days | 1% |
| Dominique | 8/10 | 5299 days | 1% |
| Charlotte | 7/10 | 5301 days | 1% |
| Hardy | 9/10 | 5301 days | 1% |
| Marjolein Hartsuiker | 8/10 | 5301 days | 1% |
| Corv V D Hof | 7/10 | 5312 days | 1% |
| Guillaume Milcent | 7/10 | 5312 days | 1% |
| Lotte Foged | 8/10 | 5313 days | 1% |
| snoopidoops | 9/10 | 5346 days | 1% |
| Waldemar Schuler | 9/10 | 5393 days | 1% |
| Lardy | 8/10 | 5394 days | 1% |
| R & M Willows | 9/10 | 5394 days | 1% |
| Amelia Tan-MaKhmalchi | 10/10 | 5438 days | 1% |
| james11 | 9/10 | 5438 days | 1% |
| kelvin88 | 10/10 | 5438 days | 1% |
| Jon11 | 10/10 | 5438 days | 1% |
| john_seasoned_traveler | 10/10 | 5438 days | 1% |
| de Smedt | 9/10 | 5624 days | 1% |
| Philip Gierke | 7/10 | 5626 days | 1% |
| Knapen | 9/10 | 5632 days | 1% |
| Kuhu | 7/10 | 5636 days | 1% |
| Christian Pflegi | 6/10 | 5640 days | 1% |
| Marianne Wheatley | 10/10 | 5640 days | 1% |
| Wheeler | 7/10 | 5641 days | 1% |
| Nick Tinnemeier | 8/10 | 5642 days | 1% |
| Fam de Kruyf | 8/10 | 5649 days | 1% |
| Fee_MacIntosh | 10/10 | 5652 days | 1% |
| Vincent | 7/10 | 5656 days | 1% |
| Sanne | 8/10 | 5656 days | 1% |
| Erica Moorhouse | 8/10 | 5657 days | 1% |
| mr Schumader | 10/10 | 5666 days | 1% |
| Helene Descamps | 7/10 | 5668 days | 1% |
| Patrick Decoster | 8/10 | 5673 days | 1% |
| Jane Hancock | 9/10 | 5675 days | 1% |
| Nadia Husain | 6/10 | 5680 days | 1% |
| hendrik king | 9/10 | 5711 days | 1% |
| Christof | 10/10 | 5986 days | 1% |
| astridaus | 9/10 | 5986 days | 1% |
| Flora | 9/10 | 6019 days | 1% |
| John Harrison | 10/10 | 6024 days | 1% |
| anon | 7/10 | 6024 days | 1% |
| Pierre Pilon | 9/10 | 6025 days | 1% |
| Peter Koeck | 10/10 | 6026 days | 1% |
| Sebastien Briant | 8/10 | 6044 days | 1% |
| Schubert, Wolfgang & Claudia | 8/10 | 6050 days | 1% |
| Beute Jacob | 7/10 | 6058 days | 1% |
| Family van Hessem | 7/10 | 6065 days | 1% |
| Thomas Signes | 7/10 | 6072 days | 1% |
| kevinp | 7/10 | 6088 days | 1% |
| ilkal | 8/10 | 6093 days | 1% |
| elskeb | 8/10 | 6095 days | 1% |
| Hanne Wichmann | 10/10 | 6111 days | 1% |
| Steffi Marco | 7/10 | 6111 days | 1% |
| Volker Jåkel | 7/10 | 6114 days | 1% |
| MartinG | 8/10 | 6384 days | 1% |
| GillianK | 9/10 | 6386 days | 1% |
| Nick | 8/10 | 6394 days | 1% |
| Nick | 9/10 | 6395 days | 1% |
| Chris | 9/10 | 6400 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
-1.70% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 108 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 142 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 139 | -1.67% |
| 140 | -1.68% |
| 141 | -1.69% |
| 142 | -1.70% |
| 143 | -1.71% |
| 144 | -1.73% |
| 145 | -1.74% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
3.29% 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.