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 firstname.lastname@example.org. 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||32 days||99.84||100%|
|Ann Boekstegers||10/10||123 days||97.6||98%|
|Kat Suddaby||10/10||152 days||96.34||96%|
|Adam Mitchell||10/10||152 days||96.34||96%|
|Alexander Ruhland||10/10||183 days||94.69||95%|
|Silvere VERACRUZ||8/10||183 days||89.96||90%|
|Lizzie Lacey-Brennan||9/10||214 days||92.74||93%|
|Jonas Gemmel||10/10||214 days||92.74||93%|
|Valerie LaCrosse||10/10||244 days||90.57||91%|
|Laura Collins||10/10||306 days||85.16||85%|
|Amandine CHATAIN||9/10||336 days||82.11||82%|
|Justine Senée||9/10||337 days||82.0||82%|
|Indra Prasetyo||10/10||428 days||70.97||71%|
|SCOTT HASSLER||9/10||428 days||70.97||71%|
|Summer Peterman||10/10||429 days||70.84||71%|
|Lorrie Kaplan||10/10||458 days||66.76||67%|
|Stephanie Hill||10/10||458 days||66.76||67%|
|Will Johnson||10/10||458 days||66.76||67%|
|Bob Bergman||10/10||489 days||62.11||62%|
|Milena Tkotz||10/10||489 days||62.11||62%|
|William Nash||10/10||490 days||61.95||62%|
|Alan Whitlock||10/10||490 days||61.95||62%|
|Sean Seguin||10/10||517 days||57.64||58%|
|Chris Bollington||8/10||517 days||54.76||55%|
|Sam Atkins||10/10||518 days||57.48||58%|
|Laura Morley||10/10||548 days||52.41||52%|
|Kristen Rodgers||10/10||548 days||52.41||52%|
|fabien Lafond||9/10||548 days||52.41||52%|
|Matthijs de Jong||10/10||549 days||52.24||52%|
|Caroline Creekman||10/10||579 days||47.19||47%|
|Julie Robinson||10/10||579 days||47.19||47%|
|William Swann||10/10||579 days||47.19||47%|
|Catherine Henry||10/10||579 days||47.19||47%|
|Richard Arnot||10/10||609 days||42.43||42%|
|Tety Kusuma Wardani Tety||9/10||610 days||42.27||42%|
|Benjamin Becker||10/10||610 days||42.27||42%|
|Marieke & Wieteke||10/10||641 days||37.66||38%|
|Nurrin Akhyar Nurrinanuwar||9/10||670 days||33.62||34%|
|James Campos||10/10||702 days||29.47||30%|
|Fernando & Andrea||9/10||702 days||29.47||30%|
|Andrew Korson||10/10||733 days||25.77||26%|
|jarren Verbeek||10/10||763 days||22.47||23%|
|Hamish Wedd||8/10||824 days||15.81||16%|
|María Casanova||10/10||824 days||16.64||17%|
|Janine Shaw||10/10||854 days||14.2||14%|
|Maria Sol Fresard Disselkoen||10/10||855 days||14.13||14%|
|Sandi Fukumoto||10/10||882 days||12.19||12%|
|Theo and Rachel||10/10||882 days||12.19||12%|
|Peter & Vicki||10/10||883 days||12.12||12%|
|Stefano Muratore||10/10||883 days||12.12||12%|
|Rick Karsten||10/10||913 days||10.25||10%|
|Joel McDowell||10/10||914 days||10.19||10%|
|Rogier van Hei||8/10||914 days||9.68||10%|
|Hayley Diakiw||9/10||974 days||7.32||7%|
|LIZ WATKINS||9/10||974 days||7.32||7%|
|Olli-Pekka Heinimäki||10/10||975 days||7.28||7%|
|Sam Pillidge||10/10||1035 days||5.57||6%|
|Jason Longhos||10/10||1035 days||5.57||6%|
|Charles E Wilber||9/10||4231 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 123 days. The Mad Campers experience has 3 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 7 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 email@example.com.