G'day, 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 Spa 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.
Spa Park
Valid Reviews
90 Valid Reviews
The Spa Park experience has a total of 92 reviews. There are 90 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 90 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 36 |
|
40% |
| 9/10 | 26 |
|
29% |
| 8/10 | 16 |
|
18% |
| 7/10 | 10 |
|
11% |
| 6/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 5/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 4/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
89.00% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Spa Park valid reviews is 89.00% and is based on 90 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
81 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 90 valid reviews, the experience has 81 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 81 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 34 |
|
42% |
| 9/10 | 23 |
|
28% |
| 8/10 | 15 |
|
19% |
| 7/10 | 8 |
|
10% |
| 6/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 5/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 4/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
89.75% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Spa Park face-to-face reviews is 89.75% and is based on 81 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
76.32%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Kate Forman | 5/10 | 506 days | 100% |
| Léo | 10/10 | 1268 days | 35% |
| C J B | 10/10 | 3002 days | 4% |
| Felix Koehler | 10/10 | 3507 days | 2% |
| Lucie Revay | 7/10 | 3529 days | 2% |
| Simon Schatz | 10/10 | 3799 days | 1% |
| Nadja Guiliani | 7/10 | 3804 days | 1% |
| Jamie Serieux | 8/10 | 3807 days | 1% |
| Philipp | 7/10 | 3813 days | 1% |
| George Bellwood | 9/10 | 3815 days | 1% |
| Sarah Dorsett | 8/10 | 3815 days | 1% |
| Lewis Cole | 8/10 | 3817 days | 1% |
| Robert Klub | 10/10 | 3836 days | 1% |
| Johannes Koch | 10/10 | 3838 days | 1% |
| Clara Loizeil | 7/10 | 3844 days | 1% |
| Patrick Veber | 8/10 | 3844 days | 1% |
| Fabian | 4/10 | 3848 days | 1% |
| Maartje | 9/10 | 3849 days | 1% |
| Anders Hauke | 9/10 | 3850 days | 1% |
| Alex Reeve | 10/10 | 3857 days | 1% |
| Eric Hertort | 10/10 | 3861 days | 1% |
| Christian Meyer | 10/10 | 3861 days | 1% |
| Melissa Fuster | 8/10 | 3865 days | 1% |
| Mikkel Palleson | 10/10 | 3865 days | 1% |
| Marek Dvonsky | 8/10 | 3866 days | 1% |
| Sam | 8/10 | 3872 days | 1% |
| Gregor | 10/10 | 3877 days | 1% |
| Shany Maydan | 10/10 | 3903 days | 1% |
| Sebastian and Susanna | 9/10 | 3910 days | 1% |
| Jade Cownley | 9/10 | 4203 days | 0% |
| Pierre Planchez | 9/10 | 4222 days | 0% |
| Erik Hafuer | 9/10 | 4258 days | 0% |
| Polly Rider | 9/10 | 4284 days | 0% |
| Lea Darotchetche | 8/10 | 4445 days | 1% |
| Julia Schabenberger | 9/10 | 4523 days | 1% |
| Lola | 10/10 | 4523 days | 1% |
| Alisa | 9/10 | 4523 days | 1% |
| Laura | 10/10 | 4523 days | 1% |
| Cecilia Anderson | 9/10 | 4526 days | 1% |
| Mattias | 8/10 | 4526 days | 1% |
| Guillaume Yedoux | 8/10 | 4526 days | 1% |
| Zuzana Holubova | 8/10 | 4526 days | 1% |
| Jenny Finch | 9/10 | 4551 days | 1% |
| Agathe Dupuis | 10/10 | 4552 days | 1% |
| Florent Bouillon | 8/10 | 4552 days | 1% |
| Stephen Revah | 9/10 | 4552 days | 1% |
| Hadler | 7/10 | 4556 days | 1% |
| Callum | 9/10 | 4567 days | 1% |
| Max Meternich | 10/10 | 4569 days | 1% |
| Philip Donachie | 9/10 | 4571 days | 1% |
| Andreas Jung | 10/10 | 4579 days | 1% |
| Jesseca Klausch | 10/10 | 4581 days | 1% |
| Vincent Schaeflier | 9/10 | 4581 days | 1% |
| Victor Herranz | 10/10 | 4586 days | 1% |
| Nimh Oudhof | 10/10 | 4587 days | 1% |
| Luca Willensrock | 9/10 | 4599 days | 1% |
| Arnaud Memay | 7/10 | 4607 days | 1% |
| Julia Ahrend | 10/10 | 4617 days | 1% |
| Molly Ladd | 8/10 | 4916 days | 1% |
| Missy and Chaz | 10/10 | 4930 days | 1% |
| Pink | 8/10 | 4953 days | 1% |
| Johannes Mullner | 10/10 | 5275 days | 1% |
| Jessica Marling | 10/10 | 5275 days | 1% |
| Camille and Lucie | 9/10 | 5276 days | 1% |
| Jaroslav Gajdos | 10/10 | 5288 days | 1% |
| Carl & Desiree Potter | 9/10 | 5297 days | 1% |
| Yves & Sylvia | 7/10 | 5299 days | 1% |
| Andy Bridgman | 8/10 | 5299 days | 1% |
| Maximilian Heller | 9/10 | 5306 days | 1% |
| Luis Valenzuela | 7/10 | 5307 days | 1% |
| FamilyGuy | 9/10 | 5345 days | 1% |
| Clement_Weather | 7/10 | 5345 days | 1% |
| N smith | 9/10 | 5345 days | 1% |
| Annie | 10/10 | 5376 days | 1% |
| Petra | 10/10 | 5614 days | 1% |
| Gema | 9/10 | 5634 days | 1% |
| Aimee Pollett | 7/10 | 5641 days | 1% |
| Vanessa Hanzen | 10/10 | 5643 days | 1% |
| Rissa W | 9/10 | 5651 days | 1% |
| Natthien Le Gall | 8/10 | 5652 days | 1% |
| Rebecca Stones | 10/10 | 5653 days | 1% |
| Matthijs Muijsers | 9/10 | 5672 days | 1% |
| hooperuk | 10/10 | 5985 days | 1% |
| John N | 10/10 | 6010 days | 1% |
| Blair Malcolm | 10/10 | 6025 days | 1% |
| Hailey & Fin | 10/10 | 6056 days | 1% |
| varenaee | 9/10 | 6091 days | 1% |
| Pieter Neeleman | 10/10 | 6118 days | 1% |
| WiebkeS | 10/10 | 6366 days | 1% |
| Lars Haf | 10/10 | 6368 days | 1% |
Adjustments
No Adjustment
Several adjustments to the weighted average may be added to improve relevancy and credibility. Spa Park does not meet the criteria for any of these adjustments to apply.
Balancing Adjustment
4.16% 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 folk 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
80%
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.