Hi there, 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 Mad Campers.
If you have any questions or comments about our ranking score calculation please get in touch at email@example.com. We don't believe this is perfect or complete so we're always interested in ways we might make improvements.
65 Valid Reviews
The Mad Campers experience has a total of 69 reviews. There are 65 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 65 valid reviews:
The raw data average (mean) for all the Mad Campers valid reviews is 96.92% and is based on 65 valid reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here as a comparison to the weighted average.
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.
|Brooke O'Connell||10/10||115 days||97.9||100%|
|Ann Boekstegers||10/10||206 days||93.28||95%|
|Kat Suddaby||10/10||235 days||91.25||93%|
|Adam Mitchell||10/10||235 days||91.25||93%|
|Alexander Ruhland||10/10||266 days||88.79||91%|
|Silvere VERACRUZ||8/10||266 days||84.35||86%|
|Lizzie Lacey-Brennan||9/10||297 days||86.02||88%|
|Jonas Gemmel||10/10||297 days||86.02||88%|
|Valerie LaCrosse||10/10||327 days||83.06||85%|
|Laura Collins||10/10||389 days||76.02||78%|
|Amandine CHATAIN||9/10||419 days||72.18||74%|
|Justine Senée||9/10||420 days||72.05||74%|
|Indra Prasetyo||10/10||511 days||58.62||60%|
|SCOTT HASSLER||9/10||511 days||58.62||60%|
|Summer Peterman||10/10||512 days||58.46||60%|
|Lorrie Kaplan||10/10||541 days||53.62||55%|
|Stephanie Hill||10/10||541 days||53.62||55%|
|Will Johnson||10/10||541 days||53.62||55%|
|Bob Bergman||10/10||572 days||48.34||49%|
|Milena Tkotz||10/10||572 days||48.34||49%|
|William Nash||10/10||573 days||48.18||49%|
|Alan Whitlock||10/10||573 days||48.18||49%|
|Sean Seguin||10/10||600 days||43.83||45%|
|Chris Bollington||8/10||600 days||41.64||43%|
|Sam Atkins||10/10||601 days||43.67||45%|
|Laura Morley||10/10||631 days||39.12||40%|
|Kristen Rodgers||10/10||631 days||39.12||40%|
|fabien Lafond||9/10||631 days||39.12||40%|
|Matthijs de Jong||10/10||632 days||38.97||40%|
|Caroline Creekman||10/10||662 days||34.71||35%|
|Julie Robinson||10/10||662 days||34.71||35%|
|William Swann||10/10||662 days||34.71||35%|
|Catherine Henry||10/10||662 days||34.71||35%|
|Richard Arnot||10/10||692 days||30.74||31%|
|Tety Kusuma Wardani Tety||9/10||693 days||30.61||31%|
|Benjamin Becker||10/10||693 days||30.61||31%|
|Marieke & Wieteke||10/10||724 days||26.81||27%|
|Nurrin Akhyar Nurrinanuwar||9/10||753 days||23.53||24%|
|James Campos||10/10||785 days||20.23||21%|
|Fernando & Andrea||9/10||785 days||20.23||21%|
|Andrew Korson||10/10||816 days||17.33||18%|
|jarren Verbeek||10/10||846 days||14.82||15%|
|Hamish Wedd||8/10||907 days||10.07||10%|
|María Casanova||10/10||907 days||10.6||11%|
|Janine Shaw||10/10||937 days||8.96||9%|
|Maria Sol Fresard Disselkoen||10/10||938 days||8.91||9%|
|Sandi Fukumoto||10/10||965 days||7.68||8%|
|Theo and Rachel||10/10||965 days||7.68||8%|
|Peter & Vicki||10/10||966 days||7.64||8%|
|Stefano Muratore||10/10||966 days||7.64||8%|
|Rick Karsten||10/10||996 days||6.55||7%|
|Joel McDowell||10/10||997 days||6.52||7%|
|Rogier van Hei||8/10||997 days||6.2||6%|
|Hayley Diakiw||9/10||1057 days||5.23||5%|
|LIZ WATKINS||9/10||1057 days||5.23||5%|
|Olli-Pekka Heinimäki||10/10||1058 days||5.22||5%|
|Sam Pillidge||10/10||1118 days||4.95||5%|
|Jason Longhos||10/10||1118 days||4.95||5%|
|Charles E Wilber||9/10||4314 days||0.0||0%|
Several adjustments to the weighted average are added to improve relevancy and credibility. These adjustments apply equally to all experiences that meet the criteria.
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 Mad Campers experience has plenty of reviews and does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
Recent reviews reflect the experience as it currently operates. This means it's important to get fresh reviews. Some experiences discovered they could get a few good reviews and then, resting on their laurels, discourage any further reviews. This adjustment stimulates experiences to be positively involved in the review generating process and discourages them from manipulating the ranking system in this manner.
What constitutes a recent review is based on the how old it is, what type of experience it is applied to and and what time of year it currently is. Due to the seasonal nature of many businesses, what is considered recent is dynamically adjusted throughout the year.
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received enough reviews within the last 71 days. The Mad Campers experience has 0 recent rankings. Adjustments are according to the following table:
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 Mad Campers experience has been adjusted for 90 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
The final ranking score once adjustments and rounding has been applied. This value is cached and recalculated each day. Therefore it may not be precisely accurate based on the other values presented.
If you have any questions or comments about our ranking score calculation please get in touch at firstname.lastname@example.org.