G'day, 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 TECT Park – Freedom Camping Site.
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.
48 Valid Reviews
The TECT Park – Freedom Camping Site experience has a total of 48 valid reviews. There are no 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.
Within these 48 valid reviews, the experience has 2 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 48 valid reviews:
Rating | Count | Percentage | |
---|---|---|---|
10/10 | 22 |
|
46% |
9/10 | 15 |
|
31% |
8/10 | 8 |
|
17% |
7/10 | 1 |
|
2% |
6/10 | 1 |
|
2% |
5/10 | 1 |
|
2% |
4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
91.04% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the TECT Park – Freedom Camping Site valid reviews is 91.04% and is based on 48 valid reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here as a comparison to the weighted average.
95.55%
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 |
---|---|---|---|
Daniel Carranza | 10/10 | 5 days | 100% |
Aaron | 9/10 | 35 days | 99% |
Rhea Y | 10/10 | 35 days | 100% |
golden menu | 9/10 | 35 days | 99% |
cclou | 10/10 | 158 days | 99% |
Lulu | 10/10 | 219 days | 97% |
Serena | 8/10 | 1709 days | 4% |
Fran | 9/10 | 1740 days | 4% |
Backpack On Fire | 10/10 | 1740 days | 4% |
Remon | 10/10 | 1801 days | 3% |
Martin Hansen | 10/10 | 1832 days | 3% |
Bakers | 9/10 | 1862 days | 3% |
Shane Howe | 10/10 | 1862 days | 3% |
Kiwi kamper | 8/10 | 1924 days | 3% |
Michelle Strydom | 10/10 | 2015 days | 3% |
Marion & Leonie | 9/10 | 2074 days | 3% |
Courtney | 9/10 | 2074 days | 3% |
jcastl | 9/10 | 2166 days | 3% |
Rikke Hessellund, Denmark | 8/10 | 2411 days | 2% |
Keith Salway | 10/10 | 2450 days | 1% |
Kyra Trouw | 10/10 | 2487 days | 2% |
Annina Jarvinen | 5/10 | 2493 days | 1% |
Claudie MieZech | 10/10 | 2523 days | 2% |
Christoper Crowhurst | 10/10 | 2570 days | 2% |
Greta Ross | 8/10 | 2585 days | 2% |
Greg Smith | 9/10 | 2632 days | 2% |
Nathan Lal | 9/10 | 2643 days | 2% |
Daryl Fletcher | 10/10 | 2668 days | 2% |
Blossom Yoshida | 9/10 | 2685 days | 2% |
Lucile Gendre | 9/10 | 2733 days | 2% |
Nicholas Tranchant | 9/10 | 2740 days | 2% |
Jana Welsch | 10/10 | 2754 days | 2% |
Sky Pardoe Davies | 8/10 | 2759 days | 1% |
Christine Allgaier | 10/10 | 2786 days | 1% |
Alison Gonscak | 10/10 | 2787 days | 1% |
Jose Verli | 10/10 | 2914 days | 1% |
Philipp Jahn | 8/10 | 2935 days | 1% |
Aidan Byrne | 7/10 | 2944 days | 1% |
Eric Pollard | 10/10 | 2962 days | 1% |
Thomas Nix | 9/10 | 3061 days | 1% |
Peter Barker | 10/10 | 3119 days | 1% |
Sandra Hamilton | 9/10 | 3131 days | 1% |
George Bellwood | 9/10 | 3132 days | 0% |
Philippa and Adam | 10/10 | 3133 days | 1% |
Nina Jensen | 10/10 | 3179 days | 1% |
Tomas Soldat | 8/10 | 3200 days | 1% |
Ahmed Mohsen Aly | 8/10 | 3261 days | 0% |
Niall Crosby | 6/10 | 3384 days | 0% |
No Adjustment
Several adjustments to the weighted average may be added to improve relevancy and credibility. TECT Park – Freedom Camping Site does not meet the criteria for any of these adjustments to apply.
0.38% 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.
96%
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.