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
62.50%
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 | 142 days | 100% |
| Viktoria | 6/10 | 417 days | 84% |
| Ofir | 2/10 | 476 days | 43% |
| Jamie | 7/10 | 842 days | 60% |
| Paulo | 4/10 | 964 days | 33% |
| Or Guz | 3/10 | 1176 days | 17% |
| Patrick Reuvers | 2/10 | 1176 days | 14% |
| Trui Waalwijk | 6/10 | 1207 days | 25% |
| Julia | 7/10 | 1238 days | 25% |
| Romy De Bruin | 8/10 | 1268 days | 24% |
| Paul Dempsey | 3/10 | 1268 days | 13% |
| Caolan Harvey | 9/10 | 1268 days | 24% |
| HAJOON PARK | 10/10 | 1329 days | 21% |
| Georgia | 9/10 | 1906 days | 5% |
| Dan | 8/10 | 1968 days | 5% |
| Marnie | 8/10 | 2303 days | 4% |
| Lisa | 8/10 | 2364 days | 4% |
| Celly | 8/10 | 2609 days | 4% |
| Dan | 5/10 | 2699 days | 3% |
| sally m | 9/10 | 2882 days | 3% |
| Harriet Smith | 8/10 | 3339 days | 2% |
| Marcel G | 2/10 | 3442 days | 1% |
| Helen Keck | 6/10 | 3556 days | 1% |
| Beth Goodrich | 5/10 | 3563 days | 1% |
| Alicia McCormick | 6/10 | 3573 days | 1% |
| Monique Schreiner | 9/10 | 3581 days | 2% |
| Nipon Assanuk | 6/10 | 3658 days | 1% |
| Susanne Muller | 6/10 | 3673 days | 1% |
| Jenny Adams | 7/10 | 3686 days | 1% |
| Sara Dimnik | 7/10 | 3686 days | 1% |
| Bert Strijtveen | 5/10 | 3725 days | 1% |
| Craig Dawson | 9/10 | 3823 days | 1% |
| Harriet Bramley | 6/10 | 3889 days | 1% |
| Fabien Metro | 3/10 | 3921 days | 0% |
| Saskia Luecke | 6/10 | 4001 days | 1% |
| Daniel Jurt | 3/10 | 4011 days | 0% |
| Nils Holdack | 2/10 | 4031 days | 0% |
| Natalia Lukito | 6/10 | 4077 days | 0% |
| Elles Janssen | 7/10 | 4128 days | 0% |
| ct2034 | 1/10 | 4128 days | 0% |
| imran pariyani | 9/10 | 4138 days | 0% |
| Jam Boggomann | 7/10 | 4156 days | 0% |
| Paul de Bruijn | 8/10 | 4170 days | 0% |
| Sina Leidig | 9/10 | 4189 days | 0% |
| Robert Webber | 1/10 | 4189 days | 0% |
| Martin Sajdok | 3/10 | 4406 days | 0% |
| Jesper Henriksen | 8/10 | 4430 days | 1% |
| Helene Andersen | 7/10 | 4430 days | 1% |
| Douglas Dean | 8/10 | 4435 days | 1% |
| Linus Larsson | 4/10 | 4441 days | 1% |
| Andrew Magill | 9/10 | 4441 days | 1% |
| Anna Guzewiez | 7/10 | 4454 days | 1% |
| Simon Tanguy | 8/10 | 4454 days | 1% |
| Inga Memmen | 9/10 | 4461 days | 1% |
| Richard van den Bosch | 8/10 | 4479 days | 1% |
| Ina Daubenbuechel | 9/10 | 4479 days | 1% |
| Uta Dingebauer | 9/10 | 4479 days | 1% |
| Julia Amberger | 8/10 | 4485 days | 1% |
| Annalina Drebald | 9/10 | 4485 days | 1% |
| Nicolas Trezeguet | 8/10 | 4495 days | 1% |
| Jesse Farrell | 8/10 | 4503 days | 1% |
| Jeremy Maurer | 8/10 | 4525 days | 1% |
| Erin Decker | 5/10 | 4525 days | 1% |
| 2 tent travelers from Montreal | 6/10 | 4525 days | 1% |
| Elise Robson | 7/10 | 4708 days | 1% |
| Deon Bossenger | 9/10 | 4769 days | 1% |
| shaynne thompson | 6/10 | 4769 days | 1% |
| Marla Fogh | 9/10 | 4783 days | 1% |
| Wayne Kerr | 5/10 | 4787 days | 1% |
| Abby Rescr | 8/10 | 4800 days | 1% |
| Frederick Dean | 8/10 | 4800 days | 1% |
| Helen Dean | 8/10 | 4800 days | 1% |
| Joey Mertzig | 8/10 | 4817 days | 1% |
| Alison Langley | 8/10 | 4872 days | 1% |
| Michael Kretzschmar | 8/10 | 4876 days | 1% |
| Andreas and Christine and Nora Busch | 8/10 | 4889 days | 1% |
| David | 10/10 | 4920 days | 1% |
| Moni01 | 2/10 | 5134 days | 0% |
| Laura vanGool | 8/10 | 5150 days | 1% |
| Emma Bagguley | 10/10 | 5172 days | 1% |
| R Straathof | 8/10 | 5181 days | 1% |
| Jessica Lane | 9/10 | 5191 days | 1% |
| DJohnson | 8/10 | 5347 days | 1% |
| Marc Edwards | 8/10 | 5489 days | 1% |
| Sean Brownell | 7/10 | 5500 days | 1% |
| Sophie Burge | 7/10 | 5508 days | 1% |
| Michaela Strohmarer | 10/10 | 5523 days | 1% |
| Carolin Moberg | 8/10 | 5536 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
-1.87% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 70 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 113 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 110 | -1.82% |
| 111 | -1.84% |
| 112 | -1.86% |
| 113 | -1.87% |
| 114 | -1.89% |
| 115 | -1.91% |
| 116 | -1.92% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
13.50% 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.