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 Wharariki Beach 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.
Wharariki Beach Holiday Park
Valid Reviews
71 Valid Reviews
The Wharariki Beach Holiday Park experience has a total of 74 reviews. There are 71 valid reviews that are included when calculating the ranking score and 3 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 71 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 10 |
|
14% |
| 9/10 | 20 |
|
28% |
| 8/10 | 13 |
|
18% |
| 7/10 | 6 |
|
8% |
| 6/10 | 7 |
|
10% |
| 5/10 | 5 |
|
7% |
| 4/10 | 2 |
|
3% |
| 3/10 | 3 |
|
4% |
| 2/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 1/10 | 4 |
|
6% |
72.68% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Wharariki Beach Holiday Park valid reviews is 72.68% and is based on 71 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
18 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 71 valid reviews, the experience has 18 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 18 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 2 |
|
11% |
| 9/10 | 7 |
|
39% |
| 8/10 | 4 |
|
22% |
| 7/10 | 2 |
|
11% |
| 6/10 | 1 |
|
6% |
| 5/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 4/10 | 1 |
|
6% |
| 3/10 | 1 |
|
6% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
78.89% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Wharariki Beach Holiday Park face-to-face reviews is 78.89% and is based on 18 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
72.18%
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 | 9/10 | 19 days | 100% |
| Emily | 8/10 | 49 days | 99% |
| Romloo | 1/10 | 80 days | 41% |
| Puiz | 5/10 | 80 days | 77% |
| Shaun | 6/10 | 108 days | 86% |
| Hughbert | 9/10 | 139 days | 99% |
| Jenda | 1/10 | 139 days | 40% |
| Dina | 9/10 | 170 days | 98% |
| Noel Robertson | 1/10 | 353 days | 38% |
| Pauline | 10/10 | 445 days | 90% |
| Lothar Valentijn | 9/10 | 931 days | 51% |
| Jill and Keith | 5/10 | 1204 days | 21% |
| Oonagh | 9/10 | 1235 days | 25% |
| Phil | 9/10 | 1480 days | 12% |
| Kysha | 7/10 | 1906 days | 4% |
| Tuomas Saarela | 6/10 | 1935 days | 4% |
| Rosey | 3/10 | 1966 days | 2% |
| Sabine | 8/10 | 1966 days | 5% |
| Julianne McKie | 9/10 | 2058 days | 4% |
| Gaudenz Schnell | 5/10 | 2271 days | 3% |
| Elin | 10/10 | 2272 days | 4% |
| Marie van Tol | 10/10 | 2300 days | 4% |
| Jess | 8/10 | 2331 days | 4% |
| Rob | 10/10 | 2362 days | 4% |
| Rosamund Gilligan | 8/10 | 2391 days | 4% |
| Nick Lange | 1/10 | 2392 days | 1% |
| Stefano Clerici | 10/10 | 2515 days | 4% |
| Luis Vigil Vidal | 9/10 | 2679 days | 3% |
| Blu Ice | 6/10 | 2745 days | 3% |
| Artemis | 9/10 | 2971 days | 3% |
| Andy Kubic | 8/10 | 3008 days | 3% |
| Lorraine Atherton | 9/10 | 3060 days | 2% |
| York Tüchelmann | 8/10 | 3307 days | 2% |
| Liz Barnett | 9/10 | 3366 days | 2% |
| Volker Stroenisch | 3/10 | 3373 days | 1% |
| Carl Opitz | 5/10 | 3378 days | 1% |
| Sarah Rutherford | 9/10 | 3421 days | 2% |
| Matthew Hallowell | 7/10 | 3424 days | 2% |
| Ron Web | 9/10 | 3488 days | 2% |
| Fay Young | 2/10 | 3551 days | 1% |
| CMG | 6/10 | 3701 days | 1% |
| Bernard Duinkerken | 4/10 | 3702 days | 1% |
| Robert Warner | 6/10 | 3791 days | 1% |
| Tanneke Lyppens | 9/10 | 3798 days | 1% |
| Vera Witek | 10/10 | 3810 days | 1% |
| Kathy Hart | 6/10 | 4037 days | 0% |
| Caroline Jonsson | 9/10 | 4066 days | 0% |
| Jonny Ronnblom | 9/10 | 4066 days | 0% |
| Brita Topp | 8/10 | 4067 days | 0% |
| Paula Renton | 4/10 | 4074 days | 0% |
| Philip Schumann | 10/10 | 4094 days | 0% |
| Angelika Bottcher | 3/10 | 4163 days | 0% |
| Jonathan | 8/10 | 4249 days | 0% |
| ozelmer | 10/10 | 4310 days | 0% |
| Tony Graham | 7/10 | 4402 days | 1% |
| Frederic Birke | 7/10 | 4465 days | 1% |
| Glenn Surzur | 8/10 | 4465 days | 1% |
| Caderet | 8/10 | 4465 days | 1% |
| Luisa | 9/10 | 4468 days | 1% |
| Sohie | 9/10 | 4468 days | 1% |
| Tanja Rudolf | 8/10 | 4541 days | 1% |
| gareth williams | 7/10 | 4614 days | 1% |
| Loesje | 8/10 | 4675 days | 1% |
| Peter Adams | 8/10 | 4822 days | 1% |
| Schael | 9/10 | 4832 days | 1% |
| lols512 | 10/10 | 4888 days | 1% |
| Powerfamily | 5/10 | 5072 days | 1% |
| John Reilly | 9/10 | 5145 days | 1% |
| Kornelia Kirf | 6/10 | 5184 days | 1% |
| Paul Smith | 7/10 | 5200 days | 1% |
| chrissie2011 | 10/10 | 5253 days | 1% |
Adjustments
No Adjustment
Several adjustments to the weighted average may be added to improve relevancy and credibility. Wharariki Beach Holiday Park does not meet the criteria for any of these adjustments to apply.
Balancing Adjustment
5.87% 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
77%
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.