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 Linksview Holiday 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.
121 Valid Reviews
The Linksview Holiday Park experience has a total of 126 reviews. There are 121 valid reviews that are included when calculating the ranking score and 5 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 121 valid reviews, the experience has 1 face-to-face review collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 121 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 108 |
|
89% |
| 9/10 | 5 |
|
4% |
| 8/10 | 6 |
|
5% |
| 7/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 6/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 5/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
97.52% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Linksview Holiday Park valid reviews is 97.52% and is based on 121 valid reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here as a comparison to the weighted average.
96.26%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Emily | 8/10 | 253 days | 98% |
| Kevin Izzadeen | 10/10 | 253 days | 100% |
| Judy | 10/10 | 343 days | 97% |
| Matthew | 10/10 | 373 days | 95% |
| Kyra De rooy | 10/10 | 465 days | 91% |
| Mark | 10/10 | 465 days | 91% |
| Anonymous | 8/10 | 646 days | 77% |
| Greg Caruso | 10/10 | 646 days | 79% |
| Laura | 10/10 | 646 days | 79% |
| olive | 10/10 | 677 days | 76% |
| Ellen | 9/10 | 708 days | 73% |
| 无名氏Y_3 | 10/10 | 738 days | 71% |
| Stephane | 10/10 | 799 days | 65% |
| Connie Buckley | 10/10 | 1104 days | 34% |
| Victoria | 9/10 | 1135 days | 31% |
| vabene1111 | 10/10 | 1135 days | 32% |
| Sue | 10/10 | 1318 days | 18% |
| Kristina | 6/10 | 1377 days | 13% |
| Enny Kraaijveld | 10/10 | 1408 days | 13% |
| BR | 1/10 | 1408 days | 4% |
| Florian S. | 10/10 | 1439 days | 12% |
| Alastair McQueen | 8/10 | 1439 days | 12% |
| Niels Wamsler-Jensen | 10/10 | 1469 days | 10% |
| Caolan Harvey | 10/10 | 1469 days | 10% |
| Genevieve Belliveau | 10/10 | 1469 days | 10% |
| CT | 10/10 | 1530 days | 8% |
| Chrissy | 10/10 | 1653 days | 5% |
| Taimi | 10/10 | 1714 days | 3% |
| Denise | 10/10 | 1714 days | 3% |
| Steph and Denise | 10/10 | 1773 days | 3% |
| Jenna | 10/10 | 1804 days | 3% |
| Karen Harper | 10/10 | 1987 days | 2% |
| Julie Sanderson | 10/10 | 2018 days | 2% |
| Nikki and B | 10/10 | 2048 days | 2% |
| Helen | 10/10 | 2048 days | 2% |
| Bethan | 10/10 | 2048 days | 2% |
| Ellie Richards | 10/10 | 2079 days | 2% |
| Laura | 10/10 | 2107 days | 2% |
| Sarah | 10/10 | 2107 days | 2% |
| Johnwnz | 10/10 | 2107 days | 2% |
| Emma | 10/10 | 2138 days | 2% |
| Matt | 10/10 | 2138 days | 2% |
| Hannah Shaw | 10/10 | 2138 days | 2% |
| Keybags | 10/10 | 2169 days | 2% |
| Raquel | 10/10 | 2169 days | 2% |
| ErinLouise | 9/10 | 2169 days | 2% |
| Gemma | 10/10 | 2230 days | 2% |
| Abi | 10/10 | 2230 days | 2% |
| Jane & Peter | 10/10 | 2260 days | 2% |
| Emma | 10/10 | 2291 days | 2% |
| Rewa Pompey | 10/10 | 2291 days | 2% |
| Hannah | 10/10 | 2291 days | 2% |
| Boardwalk Blss | 10/10 | 2322 days | 2% |
| Anna Swain | 8/10 | 2352 days | 2% |
| Joep Smits | 10/10 | 2444 days | 1% |
| Andrew Dickson | 10/10 | 2444 days | 1% |
| AC Koopal | 10/10 | 2444 days | 1% |
| Diane SG | 10/10 | 2444 days | 1% |
| Louise & Tom | 10/10 | 2473 days | 1% |
| Stefano | 10/10 | 2473 days | 1% |
| sara hollander | 10/10 | 2503 days | 1% |
| Anna-Lena | 10/10 | 2504 days | 1% |
| Phoebe | 10/10 | 2535 days | 1% |
| Rhianne & Rich | 10/10 | 2535 days | 1% |
| David and zoe | 10/10 | 2535 days | 1% |
| Mark | 10/10 | 2535 days | 1% |
| Tim | 10/10 | 2535 days | 1% |
| Beverley | 10/10 | 2565 days | 1% |
| Rasmus | 10/10 | 2565 days | 1% |
| A&E | 10/10 | 2565 days | 1% |
| Laura | 10/10 | 2565 days | 1% |
| Kenneth Richter | 10/10 | 2565 days | 1% |
| Sarah | 10/10 | 2565 days | 1% |
| Judy | 10/10 | 2565 days | 1% |
| John | 10/10 | 2565 days | 1% |
| Laura Ridout | 10/10 | 2565 days | 1% |
| Robert G | 10/10 | 2565 days | 1% |
| Willi | 10/10 | 2565 days | 1% |
| Alex S | 10/10 | 2596 days | 1% |
| Katharina and Tom | 10/10 | 2596 days | 1% |
| Elise B | 10/10 | 2657 days | 1% |
| Silvia Andorra | 10/10 | 2657 days | 1% |
| Ruud and Susan | 10/10 | 2688 days | 1% |
| Helen | 10/10 | 2688 days | 1% |
| Charlotte | 10/10 | 2718 days | 1% |
| Christa | 10/10 | 2718 days | 1% |
| FamilyOfFourFromDenmark | 10/10 | 2779 days | 1% |
| Jen | 10/10 | 2779 days | 1% |
| Pip - UK | 10/10 | 2810 days | 1% |
| becs42 | 10/10 | 2810 days | 1% |
| Federico | 10/10 | 2810 days | 1% |
| Volker | 10/10 | 2810 days | 1% |
| Eva & Florian | 10/10 | 2810 days | 1% |
| Erik Bendtsen | 10/10 | 2810 days | 1% |
| p Schwartz | 10/10 | 2838 days | 1% |
| Lucy | 10/10 | 2838 days | 1% |
| Maud | 10/10 | 2869 days | 1% |
| Sebastian | 10/10 | 2869 days | 1% |
| Nadja Kampfhenkel | 8/10 | 2869 days | 1% |
| Andy | 10/10 | 2869 days | 1% |
| Jorja | 10/10 | 2869 days | 1% |
| Campbell watt | 10/10 | 2869 days | 1% |
| Megan | 10/10 | 2900 days | 1% |
| Arne | 9/10 | 2900 days | 0% |
| Dirk | 10/10 | 2900 days | 1% |
| Sunny | 10/10 | 2930 days | 0% |
| Jakob Simons | 10/10 | 2930 days | 0% |
| Gary | 10/10 | 2930 days | 0% |
| Audiomigo | 8/10 | 2930 days | 0% |
| Grizzly Girl | 10/10 | 2961 days | 0% |
| Chris | 10/10 | 2961 days | 0% |
| Soenke and Christina | 10/10 | 2961 days | 0% |
| Emmy and Laurie | 9/10 | 2961 days | 0% |
| TT Tang | 10/10 | 2961 days | 0% |
| Pete | 10/10 | 2991 days | 0% |
| Baizurah and Friends | 10/10 | 2991 days | 0% |
| Cassie | 10/10 | 2991 days | 0% |
| Theresa Low | 10/10 | 2997 days | -1% |
| Theresa | 10/10 | 3022 days | 0% |
| Cindy & Henry | 10/10 | 3053 days | 0% |
| Justine | 10/10 | 3144 days | 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.
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 Linksview Holiday Park experience has plenty of reviews and does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
-3.95% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 47 days. However the Linksview Holiday 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 Linksview Holiday Park experience has been adjusted for 200 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 197 | -3.89% |
| 198 | -3.91% |
| 199 | -3.93% |
| 200 | -3.95% |
| 201 | -3.97% |
| 202 | -3.99% |
| 203 | -4.01% |
| … | … |
0.71% 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.
93%
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.