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 91 reviews. There are 88 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 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
62.53%
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 | 101 days | 100% |
| Viktoria | 6/10 | 376 days | 86% |
| Ofir | 2/10 | 435 days | 44% |
| Jamie | 7/10 | 801 days | 64% |
| Paulo | 4/10 | 923 days | 36% |
| Or Guz | 3/10 | 1135 days | 19% |
| Patrick Reuvers | 2/10 | 1135 days | 16% |
| Trui Waalwijk | 6/10 | 1166 days | 28% |
| Julia | 7/10 | 1197 days | 28% |
| Romy De Bruin | 8/10 | 1227 days | 27% |
| Paul Dempsey | 3/10 | 1227 days | 15% |
| Caolan Harvey | 9/10 | 1227 days | 27% |
| HAJOON PARK | 10/10 | 1288 days | 23% |
| Georgia | 9/10 | 1865 days | 5% |
| Dan | 8/10 | 1927 days | 5% |
| Marnie | 8/10 | 2262 days | 4% |
| Lisa | 8/10 | 2323 days | 4% |
| Celly | 8/10 | 2568 days | 4% |
| Dan | 5/10 | 2658 days | 3% |
| sally m | 9/10 | 2841 days | 3% |
| Harriet Smith | 8/10 | 3298 days | 2% |
| Marcel G | 2/10 | 3401 days | 1% |
| Helen Keck | 6/10 | 3515 days | 2% |
| Beth Goodrich | 5/10 | 3522 days | 1% |
| Alicia McCormick | 6/10 | 3532 days | 2% |
| Monique Schreiner | 9/10 | 3540 days | 2% |
| Nipon Assanuk | 6/10 | 3617 days | 1% |
| Susanne Muller | 6/10 | 3632 days | 1% |
| Jenny Adams | 7/10 | 3645 days | 1% |
| Sara Dimnik | 7/10 | 3645 days | 1% |
| Bert Strijtveen | 5/10 | 3684 days | 1% |
| Craig Dawson | 9/10 | 3782 days | 1% |
| Harriet Bramley | 6/10 | 3848 days | 1% |
| Fabien Metro | 3/10 | 3880 days | 1% |
| Saskia Luecke | 6/10 | 3960 days | 1% |
| Daniel Jurt | 3/10 | 3970 days | 0% |
| Nils Holdack | 2/10 | 3990 days | 0% |
| Natalia Lukito | 6/10 | 4036 days | 1% |
| Elles Janssen | 7/10 | 4088 days | 1% |
| ct2034 | 1/10 | 4088 days | 0% |
| imran pariyani | 9/10 | 4097 days | 1% |
| Jam Boggomann | 7/10 | 4115 days | 1% |
| Paul de Bruijn | 8/10 | 4129 days | 1% |
| Sina Leidig | 9/10 | 4149 days | 0% |
| Robert Webber | 1/10 | 4149 days | 0% |
| Martin Sajdok | 3/10 | 4365 days | 0% |
| Jesper Henriksen | 8/10 | 4389 days | 1% |
| Helene Andersen | 7/10 | 4389 days | 1% |
| Douglas Dean | 8/10 | 4394 days | 1% |
| Linus Larsson | 4/10 | 4400 days | 1% |
| Andrew Magill | 9/10 | 4400 days | 1% |
| Anna Guzewiez | 7/10 | 4413 days | 1% |
| Simon Tanguy | 8/10 | 4413 days | 1% |
| Inga Memmen | 9/10 | 4420 days | 1% |
| Richard van den Bosch | 8/10 | 4438 days | 1% |
| Ina Daubenbuechel | 9/10 | 4438 days | 1% |
| Uta Dingebauer | 9/10 | 4438 days | 1% |
| Julia Amberger | 8/10 | 4444 days | 1% |
| Annalina Drebald | 9/10 | 4444 days | 1% |
| Nicolas Trezeguet | 8/10 | 4454 days | 1% |
| Jesse Farrell | 8/10 | 4462 days | 1% |
| Jeremy Maurer | 8/10 | 4484 days | 1% |
| Erin Decker | 5/10 | 4484 days | 1% |
| 2 tent travelers from Montreal | 6/10 | 4484 days | 1% |
| Elise Robson | 7/10 | 4667 days | 1% |
| Deon Bossenger | 9/10 | 4728 days | 1% |
| shaynne thompson | 6/10 | 4728 days | 1% |
| Marla Fogh | 9/10 | 4742 days | 1% |
| Wayne Kerr | 5/10 | 4746 days | 1% |
| Abby Rescr | 8/10 | 4759 days | 1% |
| Frederick Dean | 8/10 | 4759 days | 1% |
| Helen Dean | 8/10 | 4759 days | 1% |
| Joey Mertzig | 8/10 | 4776 days | 1% |
| Alison Langley | 8/10 | 4831 days | 1% |
| Michael Kretzschmar | 8/10 | 4835 days | 1% |
| Andreas and Christine and Nora Busch | 8/10 | 4848 days | 1% |
| David | 10/10 | 4879 days | 1% |
| Moni01 | 2/10 | 5093 days | 0% |
| Laura vanGool | 8/10 | 5109 days | 1% |
| Emma Bagguley | 10/10 | 5131 days | 1% |
| R Straathof | 8/10 | 5140 days | 1% |
| Jessica Lane | 9/10 | 5150 days | 1% |
| DJohnson | 8/10 | 5306 days | 1% |
| Marc Edwards | 8/10 | 5448 days | 1% |
| Sean Brownell | 7/10 | 5459 days | 1% |
| Sophie Burge | 7/10 | 5467 days | 1% |
| Michaela Strohmarer | 10/10 | 5482 days | 1% |
| Carolin Moberg | 8/10 | 5495 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
-1.47% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 57 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 73 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 70 | -1.41% |
| 71 | -1.43% |
| 72 | -1.45% |
| 73 | -1.47% |
| 74 | -1.49% |
| 75 | -1.51% |
| 76 | -1.53% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
13.15% 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.