Kia ora, 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
87 Valid Reviews
The Q Box Motorhome Park experience has a total of 91 reviews. There are 87 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 87 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 4 |
|
5% |
| 9/10 | 15 |
|
17% |
| 8/10 | 27 |
|
31% |
| 7/10 | 11 |
|
13% |
| 6/10 | 11 |
|
13% |
| 5/10 | 5 |
|
6% |
| 4/10 | 2 |
|
2% |
| 3/10 | 5 |
|
6% |
| 2/10 | 5 |
|
6% |
| 1/10 | 2 |
|
2% |
68.28% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Q Box Motorhome Park valid reviews is 68.28% and is based on 87 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 87 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
60.81%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Viktoria | 6/10 | 279 days | 100% |
| Ofir | 2/10 | 338 days | 52% |
| Jamie | 7/10 | 704 days | 81% |
| Paulo | 4/10 | 826 days | 48% |
| Or Guz | 3/10 | 1038 days | 27% |
| Patrick Reuvers | 2/10 | 1038 days | 22% |
| Trui Waalwijk | 6/10 | 1069 days | 39% |
| Julia | 7/10 | 1100 days | 40% |
| Romy De Bruin | 8/10 | 1130 days | 39% |
| Paul Dempsey | 3/10 | 1130 days | 22% |
| Caolan Harvey | 9/10 | 1130 days | 39% |
| HAJOON PARK | 10/10 | 1191 days | 34% |
| Georgia | 9/10 | 1768 days | 6% |
| Dan | 8/10 | 1830 days | 6% |
| Marnie | 8/10 | 2165 days | 5% |
| Lisa | 8/10 | 2226 days | 5% |
| Celly | 8/10 | 2471 days | 4% |
| Dan | 5/10 | 2561 days | 3% |
| sally m | 9/10 | 2744 days | 4% |
| Harriet Smith | 8/10 | 3201 days | 3% |
| Marcel G | 2/10 | 3304 days | 1% |
| Helen Keck | 6/10 | 3418 days | 2% |
| Beth Goodrich | 5/10 | 3425 days | 2% |
| Alicia McCormick | 6/10 | 3435 days | 2% |
| Monique Schreiner | 9/10 | 3443 days | 2% |
| Nipon Assanuk | 6/10 | 3520 days | 2% |
| Susanne Muller | 6/10 | 3535 days | 2% |
| Jenny Adams | 7/10 | 3548 days | 2% |
| Sara Dimnik | 7/10 | 3548 days | 2% |
| Bert Strijtveen | 5/10 | 3587 days | 1% |
| Craig Dawson | 9/10 | 3685 days | 2% |
| Harriet Bramley | 6/10 | 3751 days | 1% |
| Fabien Metro | 3/10 | 3783 days | 1% |
| Saskia Luecke | 6/10 | 3863 days | 1% |
| Daniel Jurt | 3/10 | 3873 days | 1% |
| Nils Holdack | 2/10 | 3893 days | 0% |
| Natalia Lukito | 6/10 | 3939 days | 1% |
| Elles Janssen | 7/10 | 3991 days | 1% |
| ct2034 | 1/10 | 3991 days | 0% |
| imran pariyani | 9/10 | 4000 days | 1% |
| Jam Boggomann | 7/10 | 4018 days | 1% |
| Paul de Bruijn | 8/10 | 4032 days | 1% |
| Sina Leidig | 9/10 | 4052 days | 1% |
| Robert Webber | 1/10 | 4052 days | 0% |
| Martin Sajdok | 3/10 | 4268 days | 0% |
| Jesper Henriksen | 8/10 | 4292 days | 0% |
| Helene Andersen | 7/10 | 4292 days | 0% |
| Douglas Dean | 8/10 | 4297 days | 0% |
| Linus Larsson | 4/10 | 4303 days | 0% |
| Andrew Magill | 9/10 | 4303 days | 0% |
| Anna Guzewiez | 7/10 | 4316 days | 0% |
| Simon Tanguy | 8/10 | 4316 days | 0% |
| Inga Memmen | 9/10 | 4323 days | 0% |
| Richard van den Bosch | 8/10 | 4341 days | 0% |
| Ina Daubenbuechel | 9/10 | 4341 days | 0% |
| Uta Dingebauer | 9/10 | 4341 days | 0% |
| Julia Amberger | 8/10 | 4347 days | 0% |
| Annalina Drebald | 9/10 | 4347 days | 0% |
| Nicolas Trezeguet | 8/10 | 4357 days | 0% |
| Jesse Farrell | 8/10 | 4365 days | 0% |
| Jeremy Maurer | 8/10 | 4387 days | 1% |
| Erin Decker | 5/10 | 4387 days | 1% |
| 2 tent travelers from Montreal | 6/10 | 4387 days | 1% |
| Elise Robson | 7/10 | 4570 days | 1% |
| Deon Bossenger | 9/10 | 4631 days | 1% |
| shaynne thompson | 6/10 | 4631 days | 1% |
| Marla Fogh | 9/10 | 4645 days | 1% |
| Wayne Kerr | 5/10 | 4649 days | 1% |
| Abby Rescr | 8/10 | 4662 days | 1% |
| Frederick Dean | 8/10 | 4662 days | 1% |
| Helen Dean | 8/10 | 4662 days | 1% |
| Joey Mertzig | 8/10 | 4679 days | 1% |
| Alison Langley | 8/10 | 4734 days | 1% |
| Michael Kretzschmar | 8/10 | 4738 days | 1% |
| Andreas and Christine and Nora Busch | 8/10 | 4751 days | 1% |
| David | 10/10 | 4782 days | 1% |
| Moni01 | 2/10 | 4996 days | 1% |
| Laura vanGool | 8/10 | 5012 days | 1% |
| Emma Bagguley | 10/10 | 5034 days | 1% |
| R Straathof | 8/10 | 5043 days | 1% |
| Jessica Lane | 9/10 | 5053 days | 1% |
| DJohnson | 8/10 | 5209 days | 1% |
| Marc Edwards | 8/10 | 5351 days | 1% |
| Sean Brownell | 7/10 | 5362 days | 1% |
| Sophie Burge | 7/10 | 5370 days | 1% |
| Michaela Strohmarer | 10/10 | 5385 days | 1% |
| Carolin Moberg | 8/10 | 5398 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
-4.07% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 42 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 200 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 197 | -4.01% |
| 198 | -4.03% |
| 199 | -4.05% |
| 200 | -4.07% |
| 201 | -4.09% |
| 202 | -4.11% |
| 203 | -4.13% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
16.61% 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
73%
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.