Hey, 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 Hanmer Field Base and Picnic Area.
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.
Hanmer Field Base and Picnic Area
Valid Reviews
96 Valid Reviews
The Hanmer Field Base and Picnic Area experience has a total of 103 reviews. There are 96 valid reviews that are included when calculating the ranking score and 7 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 96 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 20 |
|
21% |
| 9/10 | 27 |
|
28% |
| 8/10 | 30 |
|
31% |
| 7/10 | 11 |
|
11% |
| 6/10 | 4 |
|
4% |
| 5/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 3 |
|
3% |
82.50% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Hanmer Field Base and Picnic Area valid reviews is 82.50% and is based on 96 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
5 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 96 valid reviews, the experience has 5 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 5 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 9/10 | 2 |
|
40% |
| 8/10 | 1 |
|
20% |
| 7/10 | 1 |
|
20% |
| 6/10 | 1 |
|
20% |
| 5/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
78.00% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Hanmer Field Base and Picnic Area face-to-face reviews is 78.00% and is based on 5 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
84.90%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sian | 10/10 | 69 days | 100% |
| Kirsty | 10/10 | 128 days | 99% |
| H Flynn | 7/10 | 343 days | 87% |
| Angela Teal | 7/10 | 434 days | 83% |
| Nick | 8/10 | 493 days | 85% |
| Chloe | 9/10 | 585 days | 80% |
| Debbie | 8/10 | 585 days | 79% |
| Everyonecantravel2024 | 6/10 | 616 days | 68% |
| Susan | 8/10 | 677 days | 73% |
| Mike Fricker | 10/10 | 769 days | 66% |
| Tara | 9/10 | 799 days | 63% |
| @follow.tim.warren | 9/10 | 799 days | 63% |
| Deb | 10/10 | 799 days | 64% |
| L&M | 10/10 | 830 days | 61% |
| Julian | 7/10 | 859 days | 54% |
| Carolyn | 8/10 | 921 days | 51% |
| Victoria | 7/10 | 982 days | 42% |
| Marie Perret | 8/10 | 1012 days | 42% |
| Michelle & Rob | 7/10 | 1074 days | 35% |
| Matt H | 9/10 | 1074 days | 37% |
| DBennie | 9/10 | 1135 days | 32% |
| Ty | 10/10 | 1165 days | 30% |
| Joe | 9/10 | 1196 days | 27% |
| Tom | 8/10 | 1224 days | 25% |
| Stacey & Mike | 7/10 | 1255 days | 22% |
| Corrine | 10/10 | 1316 days | 20% |
| Evan | 7/10 | 1316 days | 18% |
| Heidi Maurice | 8/10 | 1316 days | 19% |
| Rebecca Woodbridge | 8/10 | 1316 days | 19% |
| Georgia | 9/10 | 1377 days | 16% |
| Lucy | 10/10 | 1408 days | 15% |
| Mike&Fe | 10/10 | 1589 days | 8% |
| Jack | 10/10 | 1926 days | 5% |
| Henrique | 9/10 | 1985 days | 5% |
| Rey | 8/10 | 2016 days | 4% |
| Shalamar | 10/10 | 2016 days | 5% |
| Neal McCarthy | 9/10 | 2046 days | 4% |
| Josephine | 6/10 | 2077 days | 4% |
| Helen | 9/10 | 2107 days | 4% |
| Claire ALLMON | 9/10 | 2107 days | 4% |
| Doug | 8/10 | 2169 days | 4% |
| Tim | 10/10 | 2291 days | 4% |
| Stefan Hohmann | 8/10 | 2320 days | 4% |
| Daria | 10/10 | 2320 days | 4% |
| Lua | 10/10 | 2382 days | 4% |
| Jayme | 8/10 | 2412 days | 4% |
| Ambs | 10/10 | 2443 days | 4% |
| Ana | 8/10 | 2443 days | 4% |
| Jordie | 8/10 | 2473 days | 4% |
| Cass | 9/10 | 2473 days | 4% |
| Tarsha | 8/10 | 2504 days | 3% |
| Becca | 9/10 | 2565 days | 3% |
| Anastasia | 10/10 | 2565 days | 3% |
| Kristal | 10/10 | 2596 days | 3% |
| Deb | 8/10 | 2716 days | 3% |
| B.R. | 7/10 | 2716 days | 3% |
| Ymke Huisman | 6/10 | 2747 days | 3% |
| Ben | 8/10 | 2747 days | 3% |
| Sophie Skinner | 9/10 | 2777 days | 3% |
| Noreasters | 1/10 | 2777 days | 1% |
| Mike Fricker | 9/10 | 2808 days | 3% |
| Lance | 9/10 | 2808 days | 3% |
| Jenna webber | 8/10 | 2838 days | 3% |
| Brittany Jackson | 8/10 | 2869 days | 3% |
| Christina | 8/10 | 2961 days | 3% |
| Michelle D | 9/10 | 2961 days | 3% |
| Carl Fogarty | 9/10 | 2991 days | 3% |
| Simon Springett | 8/10 | 3036 days | 2% |
| Luis Vigil Vidal | 9/10 | 3064 days | 1% |
| Patrick Currier | 8/10 | 3078 days | 2% |
| Rogier Kavelaars | 8/10 | 3128 days | 2% |
| Vander Plancke Julien | 8/10 | 3134 days | 2% |
| Jasmine Andrew | 9/10 | 3157 days | 2% |
| Katherine Ong | 10/10 | 3163 days | 2% |
| Jo Dawson | 7/10 | 3285 days | 2% |
| Henry | 10/10 | 3285 days | 2% |
| Beverley Halfhide | 5/10 | 3329 days | 1% |
| Ann Le | 9/10 | 3338 days | 2% |
| Les Tregier | 10/10 | 3353 days | 2% |
| Craig Wilcock | 8/10 | 3361 days | 2% |
| Tim Statler | 9/10 | 3406 days | 2% |
| Walter Neff | 1/10 | 3415 days | 1% |
| Catherine Johnston | 8/10 | 3579 days | 1% |
| Matt Hughes | 9/10 | 3721 days | 1% |
| Sam Smith-Palomeque | 9/10 | 3738 days | 1% |
| Sean Stevens | 8/10 | 3753 days | 1% |
| Zdenda Barvinek | 9/10 | 3804 days | 1% |
| Dieter Schmees | 6/10 | 4189 days | 0% |
| Moudry Vojtech | 8/10 | 4223 days | 0% |
| Sina Leidig | 1/10 | 4238 days | 0% |
| Kathy Hart | 9/10 | 4422 days | 1% |
| Nadia R | 8/10 | 4452 days | 1% |
| John Treasure | 7/10 | 4511 days | 1% |
| Kirbyfamily | 8/10 | 4817 days | 1% |
| Bev Stott | 7/10 | 4854 days | 0% |
| Daniel Jezak | 9/10 | 4858 days | 0% |
Adjustments
No Adjustment
Several adjustments to the weighted average may be added to improve relevancy and credibility. Hanmer Field Base and Picnic Area does not meet the criteria for any of these adjustments to apply.
Balancing Adjustment
1.84% 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 folk 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
87%
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.