Hi, 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 Q Box Motorhome 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.
Q Box Motorhome Park
Valid Reviews
88 Valid Reviews
The Q Box Motorhome Park experience has a total of 92 reviews. There are 88 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.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 88 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 4 |
|
5% |
| 9/10 | 15 |
|
17% |
| 8/10 | 27 |
|
31% |
| 7/10 | 12 |
|
14% |
| 6/10 | 11 |
|
13% |
| 5/10 | 5 |
|
6% |
| 4/10 | 2 |
|
2% |
| 3/10 | 5 |
|
6% |
| 2/10 | 5 |
|
6% |
| 1/10 | 2 |
|
2% |
68.30% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Q Box Motorhome Park valid reviews is 68.30% and is based on 88 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
36 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 88 valid reviews, the experience has 36 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 36 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 2 |
|
6% |
| 9/10 | 7 |
|
19% |
| 8/10 | 19 |
|
53% |
| 7/10 | 5 |
|
14% |
| 6/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 5/10 | 1 |
|
3% |
| 4/10 | 1 |
|
3% |
| 3/10 | 1 |
|
3% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
78.33% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Q Box Motorhome Park face-to-face reviews is 78.33% and is based on 36 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
62.25%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| cirefice bernard | 7/10 | 41 days | 100% |
| Viktoria | 6/10 | 316 days | 87% |
| Ofir | 2/10 | 375 days | 45% |
| Jamie | 7/10 | 741 days | 69% |
| Paulo | 4/10 | 863 days | 40% |
| Or Guz | 3/10 | 1075 days | 22% |
| Patrick Reuvers | 2/10 | 1075 days | 18% |
| Trui Waalwijk | 6/10 | 1106 days | 32% |
| Julia | 7/10 | 1137 days | 32% |
| Romy De Bruin | 8/10 | 1167 days | 31% |
| Paul Dempsey | 3/10 | 1167 days | 17% |
| Caolan Harvey | 9/10 | 1167 days | 32% |
| HAJOON PARK | 10/10 | 1228 days | 27% |
| Georgia | 9/10 | 1805 days | 5% |
| Dan | 8/10 | 1867 days | 5% |
| Marnie | 8/10 | 2202 days | 4% |
| Lisa | 8/10 | 2263 days | 4% |
| Celly | 8/10 | 2508 days | 4% |
| Dan | 5/10 | 2598 days | 3% |
| sally m | 9/10 | 2781 days | 3% |
| Harriet Smith | 8/10 | 3238 days | 2% |
| Marcel G | 2/10 | 3341 days | 1% |
| Helen Keck | 6/10 | 3455 days | 2% |
| Beth Goodrich | 5/10 | 3462 days | 1% |
| Alicia McCormick | 6/10 | 3472 days | 2% |
| Monique Schreiner | 9/10 | 3480 days | 2% |
| Nipon Assanuk | 6/10 | 3557 days | 1% |
| Susanne Muller | 6/10 | 3572 days | 1% |
| Jenny Adams | 7/10 | 3585 days | 2% |
| Sara Dimnik | 7/10 | 3585 days | 2% |
| Bert Strijtveen | 5/10 | 3624 days | 1% |
| Craig Dawson | 9/10 | 3722 days | 1% |
| Harriet Bramley | 6/10 | 3788 days | 1% |
| Fabien Metro | 3/10 | 3820 days | 1% |
| Saskia Luecke | 6/10 | 3900 days | 1% |
| Daniel Jurt | 3/10 | 3910 days | 1% |
| Nils Holdack | 2/10 | 3930 days | 0% |
| Natalia Lukito | 6/10 | 3976 days | 1% |
| Elles Janssen | 7/10 | 4027 days | 1% |
| ct2034 | 1/10 | 4027 days | 0% |
| imran pariyani | 9/10 | 4037 days | 1% |
| Jam Boggomann | 7/10 | 4055 days | 1% |
| Paul de Bruijn | 8/10 | 4069 days | 1% |
| Sina Leidig | 9/10 | 4088 days | 1% |
| Robert Webber | 1/10 | 4088 days | 0% |
| Martin Sajdok | 3/10 | 4305 days | 0% |
| Jesper Henriksen | 8/10 | 4329 days | 0% |
| Helene Andersen | 7/10 | 4329 days | 0% |
| Douglas Dean | 8/10 | 4334 days | 0% |
| Linus Larsson | 4/10 | 4340 days | 0% |
| Andrew Magill | 9/10 | 4340 days | 0% |
| Anna Guzewiez | 7/10 | 4353 days | 0% |
| Simon Tanguy | 8/10 | 4353 days | 0% |
| Inga Memmen | 9/10 | 4360 days | 0% |
| Richard van den Bosch | 8/10 | 4378 days | 0% |
| Ina Daubenbuechel | 9/10 | 4378 days | 0% |
| Uta Dingebauer | 9/10 | 4378 days | 0% |
| Julia Amberger | 8/10 | 4384 days | 1% |
| Annalina Drebald | 9/10 | 4384 days | 1% |
| Nicolas Trezeguet | 8/10 | 4394 days | 1% |
| Jesse Farrell | 8/10 | 4402 days | 1% |
| Jeremy Maurer | 8/10 | 4424 days | 1% |
| Erin Decker | 5/10 | 4424 days | 1% |
| 2 tent travelers from Montreal | 6/10 | 4424 days | 1% |
| Elise Robson | 7/10 | 4607 days | 1% |
| Deon Bossenger | 9/10 | 4668 days | 1% |
| shaynne thompson | 6/10 | 4668 days | 1% |
| Marla Fogh | 9/10 | 4682 days | 1% |
| Wayne Kerr | 5/10 | 4686 days | 1% |
| Abby Rescr | 8/10 | 4699 days | 1% |
| Frederick Dean | 8/10 | 4699 days | 1% |
| Helen Dean | 8/10 | 4699 days | 1% |
| Joey Mertzig | 8/10 | 4716 days | 1% |
| Alison Langley | 8/10 | 4771 days | 1% |
| Michael Kretzschmar | 8/10 | 4775 days | 1% |
| Andreas and Christine and Nora Busch | 8/10 | 4788 days | 1% |
| David | 10/10 | 4819 days | 1% |
| Moni01 | 2/10 | 5033 days | 0% |
| Laura vanGool | 8/10 | 5049 days | 1% |
| Emma Bagguley | 10/10 | 5071 days | 1% |
| R Straathof | 8/10 | 5080 days | 1% |
| Jessica Lane | 9/10 | 5090 days | 1% |
| DJohnson | 8/10 | 5246 days | 1% |
| Marc Edwards | 8/10 | 5388 days | 1% |
| Sean Brownell | 7/10 | 5399 days | 1% |
| Sophie Burge | 7/10 | 5407 days | 1% |
| Michaela Strohmarer | 10/10 | 5422 days | 1% |
| Carolin Moberg | 8/10 | 5435 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 Q Box Motorhome Park experience has plenty of reviews and does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
Recent Reviews Adjustment
-0.24% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 44 days. However the Q Box Motorhome 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 Q Box Motorhome Park experience has been adjusted for 12 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 9 | -0.18% |
| 10 | -0.20% |
| 11 | -0.22% |
| 12 | -0.24% |
| 13 | -0.26% |
| 14 | -0.28% |
| 15 | -0.30% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
12.42% 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
74%
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.