Ranking Score Explained

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 Coes Ford Camping Ground.

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.

Cymen Crick's avatar

Cymen Crick

Rankers Owner

Coes Ford Camping Ground

Valid Reviews

58 Valid Reviews

The Coes Ford Camping Ground experience has a total of 62 reviews. There are 58 valid reviews that are included when calculating the ranking score and 4 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.

Within these 58 valid reviews, the experience has 1 face-to-face review collected during interviews by our team.

Below is the distribution of ratings for the 58 valid reviews:

Rating Count Percentage
10/10 18
31%
9/10 9
16%
8/10 11
19%
7/10 9
16%
6/10 1
2%
5/10 3
5%
4/10 2
3%
3/10 1
2%
2/10 0
0%
1/10 4
7%

77.24% Average

The raw data average (mean) for all the Coes Ford Camping Ground valid reviews is 77.24% and is based on 58 valid reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here as a comparison to the weighted average.

Weighted Average

83.89%

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
Laura 8/10 45 days 98%
Sarah Kot 7/10 45 days 93%
Patrick Tenbeth 10/10 45 days 100%
Berdien 10/10 76 days 100%
Phil 7/10 106 days 93%
Sabrina Bouchard 10/10 472 days 87%
Liz 10/10 625 days 78%
Ricky 7/10 656 days 70%
Andrea 5/10 656 days 57%
Matthew C 7/10 656 days 70%
Jodie Muller 10/10 656 days 75%
Orla 1/10 656 days 30%
FitzHanss 9/10 686 days 72%
Carrie 9/10 717 days 70%
Hannah 10/10 745 days 68%
Brigette 9/10 776 days 65%
Stacey & Mike 8/10 776 days 64%
Amanda Moreira 10/10 776 days 65%
Geert Alkema 10/10 807 days 63%
Jonny 8/10 1021 days 41%
Rosie 1/10 1082 days 14%
Digger operator 1/10 1233 days 9%
Patricia 10/10 1416 days 14%
Wai wai 7/10 1447 days 12%
JuneC 10/10 1506 days 10%
Kaukau 10/10 1933 days 4%
K&J 9/10 1933 days 4%
Chieco Family 3/10 1964 days 2%
jasper 5/10 2025 days 3%
Jackie Sue 7/10 2237 days 3%
Aleisha 5/10 2237 days 2%
Daniel P 10/10 2268 days 3%
Pheng Taing 10/10 2876 days 2%
Matthieu Berdugo 8/10 2880 days 2%
Hamish 1/10 2966 days 0%
estelle D 6/10 2997 days 2%
Megan Jurgensmeyer 9/10 3001 days 2%
Sue Horstra 9/10 3004 days 2%
Eric Pollard 8/10 3094 days 2%
Emma Stiles 9/10 3164 days 2%
mirimirik 4/10 3185 days 1%
Brian Stelbotsky 9/10 3215 days 2%
Shaun Burns 4/10 3225 days 1%
Georg H. 9/10 3270 days 1%
Tony Maroulis 10/10 3283 days 1%
Ed Linklater 7/10 3285 days 1%
Jamie McLauchlan 8/10 3330 days 1%
Suzanne Vermeulen 8/10 3393 days 1%
Kevin Chen 8/10 3425 days 1%
Bob Fontaine 8/10 3432 days 1%
Charlotte Cooper 8/10 3434 days 1%
craig hatherly 8/10 3455 days 1%
Evangeline Chua 10/10 3531 days 1%
James Webster 10/10 3594 days 1%
Wyklicky 7/10 3612 days 1%
Andrew B 10/10 3789 days 0%
Claudia 10/10 3819 days 0%
Tom Guthknecht 7/10 3967 days 0%

Adjustments

No Adjustment

Several adjustments to the weighted average may be added to improve relevancy and credibility. Coes Ford Camping Ground does not meet the criteria for any of these adjustments to apply.

Balancing Adjustment

2.05% 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

86%

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.