Hi there, 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 Central City Camping Park.
If you have any questions or comments about our ranking score calculation please get in touch at firstname.lastname@example.org. We don't believe this is perfect or complete so we're always interested in ways we might make improvements.
45 Valid Reviews
The Central City Camping Park experience has a total of 47 reviews. There are 45 valid reviews that are included when calculating the ranking score and 2 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 45 valid reviews:
The raw data average (mean) for all the Central City Camping Park valid reviews is 84.44% and is based on 45 valid reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here as a comparison to the weighted average.
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.
|Allan and Kelly||10/10||164 days||95.74||100%|
|James Handry||10/10||195 days||93.97||98%|
|sam wei||10/10||347 days||80.92||84%|
|Tan Kia Peng||10/10||347 days||80.92||84%|
|Andrew Joy||10/10||378 days||77.36||81%|
|John R||10/10||378 days||77.36||81%|
|Sunny Mu||1/10||408 days||53.74||55%|
|Angela Hornby||8/10||560 days||47.84||49%|
|James & Kerry||5/10||621 days||32.89||33%|
|Cheong Kuay Fong||3/10||837 days||11.97||11%|
|Gary Prescot||5/10||1019 days||4.79||4%|
|Josephine Ayvadian||7/10||1231 days||4.31||3%|
|Geert Muffels||8/10||1244 days||4.47||3%|
|Rebecca Lindsey||8/10||1289 days||4.39||3%|
|Sheryl Hicks||8/10||1360 days||4.26||3%|
|Christine Hurring||10/10||1365 days||4.47||3%|
|Diane Klasen||8/10||1541 days||3.92||3%|
|Connie Hopper||10/10||1551 days||4.11||3%|
|Ed Linklater||10/10||1608 days||4.0||3%|
|cassandra stirling||10/10||1624 days||3.96||3%|
|Helen B||10/10||1680 days||3.86||3%|
|Richard Kirby||10/10||1686 days||3.84||3%|
|Emma Rochester||9/10||1731 days||3.76||3%|
|Fiona and Ben||7/10||1747 days||3.39||2%|
|Darwin Dean||9/10||1902 days||3.42||2%|
|John Drake||9/10||1968 days||3.29||2%|
|Silvia Hudakova||9/10||2051 days||3.13||2%|
|Ray Dac||9/10||2296 days||2.65||1%|
|Nicholas Ng||10/10||2417 days||2.41||1%|
|JAMIE MACGREGOR||10/10||2507 days||2.24||1%|
|Trish Jones||10/10||2630 days||2.0||1%|
|Alex S||10/10||2661 days||1.94||1%|
|gary spring||9/10||2720 days||1.82||0%|
|William Notcutt||4/10||2751 days||1.39||0%|
|margaret Everitt||10/10||2751 days||1.76||0%|
Several adjustments to the weighted average are added to improve relevancy and credibility. These adjustments apply equally to all experiences that meet the criteria.
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 Central City Camping Park experience has plenty of reviews and does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 125 days. However the Central City Camping 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 Central City Camping Park experience has been adjusted for 140 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
The final ranking score once adjustments and rounding has been applied. This value is cached and recalculated each day. Therefore it may not be precisely accurate based on the other values presented.
If you have any questions or comments about our ranking score calculation please get in touch at email@example.com.