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 Wellington TOP 10 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.
Wellington TOP 10 Holiday Park
Valid Reviews
191 Valid Reviews
The Wellington TOP 10 Holiday Park experience has a total of 194 reviews. There are 191 valid reviews that are included when calculating the ranking score and 3 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 191 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 21 |
|
11% |
| 9/10 | 33 |
|
17% |
| 8/10 | 33 |
|
17% |
| 7/10 | 24 |
|
13% |
| 6/10 | 21 |
|
11% |
| 5/10 | 22 |
|
12% |
| 4/10 | 10 |
|
5% |
| 3/10 | 7 |
|
4% |
| 2/10 | 10 |
|
5% |
| 1/10 | 10 |
|
5% |
66.28% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Wellington TOP 10 Holiday Park valid reviews is 66.28% and is based on 191 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
121 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 191 valid reviews, the experience has 121 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 121 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 12 |
|
10% |
| 9/10 | 22 |
|
18% |
| 8/10 | 19 |
|
16% |
| 7/10 | 13 |
|
11% |
| 6/10 | 16 |
|
13% |
| 5/10 | 18 |
|
15% |
| 4/10 | 8 |
|
7% |
| 3/10 | 5 |
|
4% |
| 2/10 | 5 |
|
4% |
| 1/10 | 3 |
|
2% |
66.69% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Wellington TOP 10 Holiday Park face-to-face reviews is 66.69% and is based on 121 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
82.26%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Le | 10/10 | 21 days | 100% |
| Bevjean | 10/10 | 52 days | 100% |
| Aragorn | 9/10 | 205 days | 97% |
| Maud Jabouley | 10/10 | 205 days | 98% |
| Terry | 9/10 | 326 days | 93% |
| Katy | 5/10 | 326 days | 72% |
| Tzan from CA | 6/10 | 510 days | 73% |
| Fletch | 10/10 | 660 days | 75% |
| Linda | 9/10 | 660 days | 74% |
| Amy Shoemake | 8/10 | 722 days | 69% |
| Erin Cheng | 4/10 | 722 days | 46% |
| Lucas | 8/10 | 752 days | 66% |
| Sarah | 10/10 | 783 days | 65% |
| James | 8/10 | 1087 days | 35% |
| charles | 1/10 | 1362 days | 7% |
| Leigh Billing | 1/10 | 1421 days | 6% |
| K1W1jax | 2/10 | 1635 days | 3% |
| Lyn McIvor | 9/10 | 1727 days | 5% |
| Maria | 1/10 | 1727 days | 2% |
| Liz Wade | 8/10 | 1755 days | 5% |
| Ian & Wendy | 1/10 | 1756 days | 2% |
| Moritz | 8/10 | 1787 days | 5% |
| Christoph | 5/10 | 1787 days | 4% |
| Mrs Lounis | 8/10 | 1818 days | 5% |
| Ryan | 8/10 | 1848 days | 5% |
| Kate | 8/10 | 2032 days | 5% |
| Clare & Gerry | 10/10 | 2093 days | 4% |
| Jgcanada | 10/10 | 2121 days | 4% |
| Leanne | 8/10 | 2121 days | 4% |
| Nadja Kampfhenkel | 7/10 | 2152 days | 4% |
| helen reeve | 9/10 | 2244 days | 4% |
| Boguslaw MAKIELLO | 2/10 | 2441 days | 2% |
| Shira LA | 7/10 | 2486 days | 3% |
| Helen Rimmer | 10/10 | 2498 days | 4% |
| Marine Fauquenot | 6/10 | 2502 days | 3% |
| Lene Hendel | 6/10 | 2503 days | 3% |
| Debbie Lesurf | 9/10 | 2555 days | 4% |
| Carl von Horstig | 6/10 | 2587 days | 3% |
| Jasmine Andrew | 9/10 | 2593 days | 3% |
| Lei Horton | 9/10 | 2679 days | 3% |
| Paul Batty | 7/10 | 2694 days | 3% |
| Roger Foley | 1/10 | 2791 days | 1% |
| Mailhos Cécile | 7/10 | 2826 days | 3% |
| Paula Barclay | 3/10 | 2837 days | 2% |
| Charlie Vaughan | 6/10 | 2839 days | 3% |
| Greg Parkes | 7/10 | 2855 days | 3% |
| Rebecca Lindsey | 7/10 | 2881 days | 3% |
| Gaurav Bhutani | 5/10 | 2882 days | 2% |
| ben carroll | 4/10 | 2973 days | 2% |
| Peter Barker | 8/10 | 3167 days | 2% |
| Christina Wakolbinger | 1/10 | 3193 days | 1% |
| Staffan Johansson | 9/10 | 3199 days | 2% |
| Nina | 3/10 | 3248 days | 1% |
| Ron Web | 7/10 | 3309 days | 2% |
| Will Waine | 9/10 | 3400 days | 2% |
| Elka Keijzer | 5/10 | 3492 days | 1% |
| holidaymad from Solihull | 8/10 | 3612 days | 1% |
| Mike Fricker | 8/10 | 3888 days | 1% |
| Helma Druyken | 6/10 | 3917 days | 1% |
| MARK PALMER | 2/10 | 3919 days | 0% |
| Eva-Maria Krueger | 7/10 | 3919 days | 1% |
| Janina Zwerver | 5/10 | 3921 days | 1% |
| Chris | 10/10 | 3978 days | 1% |
| Elin Andersson | 8/10 | 3978 days | 1% |
| Elin Paulssen | 9/10 | 3978 days | 1% |
| Xan Northman | 7/10 | 3978 days | 1% |
| W & K Boyd | 2/10 | 4100 days | 0% |
| Ton Martens | 3/10 | 4275 days | 0% |
| Michael Nolan | 8/10 | 4284 days | 0% |
| Schuster | 4/10 | 4297 days | 0% |
| Andrew Pearce | 9/10 | 4343 days | 0% |
| Hanneke P | 7/10 | 4343 days | 0% |
| Tony Hines | 9/10 | 4360 days | 0% |
| Peter | 8/10 | 4367 days | 0% |
| Anne and John | 6/10 | 4373 days | 0% |
| Terry Coles | 9/10 | 4374 days | 0% |
| Marian | 5/10 | 4376 days | 0% |
| Adam Hassan | 6/10 | 4379 days | 0% |
| Henzen | 7/10 | 4383 days | 1% |
| Julia Ramseier | 10/10 | 4386 days | 1% |
| Lisa Blake | 5/10 | 4390 days | 1% |
| Verest | 9/10 | 4390 days | 1% |
| Megan Child | 9/10 | 4391 days | 1% |
| Peter Kent | 10/10 | 4636 days | 1% |
| Michael Touzer | 5/10 | 4644 days | 1% |
| Frank Claassen | 8/10 | 4645 days | 1% |
| Michael Jefferies | 9/10 | 4652 days | 1% |
| D van Dongen | 7/10 | 4653 days | 1% |
| Manuela | 6/10 | 4654 days | 1% |
| Lotte Zwail | 7/10 | 4658 days | 1% |
| Frans Roebroek | 9/10 | 4660 days | 1% |
| Patricia Fearon | 7/10 | 4661 days | 1% |
| Merlyn | 6/10 | 4662 days | 1% |
| Ozgla | 1/10 | 4662 days | 0% |
| Gillian MacLaren | 5/10 | 4663 days | 1% |
| Dave Simpson | 9/10 | 4663 days | 1% |
| Lepied | 5/10 | 4665 days | 1% |
| Beyeler | 10/10 | 4666 days | 1% |
| Graham Swinyard | 8/10 | 4672 days | 1% |
| Maria Dietrich | 8/10 | 4673 days | 1% |
| Hans Erik Munch | 6/10 | 4676 days | 1% |
| Margaret Wendell | 7/10 | 4676 days | 1% |
| Sebastian | 8/10 | 4676 days | 1% |
| Steve Collier | 4/10 | 4677 days | 1% |
| Marie Frank | 10/10 | 4678 days | 1% |
| Sandy & Michaela | 10/10 | 4691 days | 1% |
| Graham | 7/10 | 4709 days | 1% |
| ZephyrTL | 2/10 | 4709 days | 0% |
| hendrik king | 1/10 | 4709 days | 0% |
| Niels Daubjerg | 10/10 | 4741 days | 1% |
| Robert Carswell | 9/10 | 4746 days | 1% |
| Steve Eley | 1/10 | 4749 days | 0% |
| Jan & Marian | 6/10 | 4752 days | 1% |
| Rudlinger | 4/10 | 4757 days | 1% |
| Verhahr | 5/10 | 4760 days | 1% |
| Gary A | 9/10 | 4770 days | 1% |
| damaca | 2/10 | 4831 days | 0% |
| Dave van Bergen | 8/10 | 4979 days | 1% |
| Ralph & Marloes Meyers | 8/10 | 4983 days | 1% |
| Philip Gierke | 8/10 | 4989 days | 1% |
| Adi Leheucel | 4/10 | 4996 days | 1% |
| Oliver Berg | 5/10 | 4998 days | 1% |
| Karsten Tannhauser | 8/10 | 4998 days | 1% |
| Dave Jones | 7/10 | 4999 days | 1% |
| Rens Hemselmans | 6/10 | 5001 days | 1% |
| Michael Simmang | 8/10 | 5003 days | 1% |
| Michael Howat | 7/10 | 5005 days | 1% |
| Nicola Shaw | 8/10 | 5008 days | 1% |
| Katy Bourne | 5/10 | 5009 days | 1% |
| Kathleen Brown | 4/10 | 5013 days | 1% |
| Melanie Gruber | 8/10 | 5016 days | 1% |
| Diete Rokosch | 9/10 | 5016 days | 1% |
| Anne | 5/10 | 5017 days | 1% |
| Colin Lockwood | 7/10 | 5018 days | 1% |
| Annelie & Martin | 8/10 | 5019 days | 1% |
| Anita Aleva | 6/10 | 5027 days | 1% |
| Haan Begerian | 5/10 | 5029 days | 1% |
| Kurt | 7/10 | 5030 days | 1% |
| Annie Pennington | 10/10 | 5030 days | 1% |
| Pat MacDonald | 7/10 | 5030 days | 1% |
| David | 6/10 | 5033 days | 1% |
| Marianne Astorp | 6/10 | 5034 days | 1% |
| Rossiter | 5/10 | 5036 days | 1% |
| D Oostrum | 9/10 | 5038 days | 1% |
| Iain Sutherland | 8/10 | 5038 days | 1% |
| Meg & Steve | 6/10 | 5313 days | 1% |
| uceil | 4/10 | 5328 days | 1% |
| Andy & Louise Dutton | 10/10 | 5367 days | 1% |
| Richard Spore | 8/10 | 5367 days | 1% |
| Pam Know | 6/10 | 5375 days | 1% |
| Tony Killingray | 3/10 | 5383 days | 1% |
| Chris Jones | 2/10 | 5386 days | 0% |
| Pierre Pilon | 9/10 | 5388 days | 1% |
| Denecke Thorsten | 4/10 | 5389 days | 1% |
| Roger Trusedale | 3/10 | 5390 days | 1% |
| Bunnik | 9/10 | 5393 days | 1% |
| Marc Hoehstra | 8/10 | 5394 days | 1% |
| Alan Howe | 6/10 | 5400 days | 1% |
| Helen Power | 9/10 | 5403 days | 1% |
| Bryan Keddie | 3/10 | 5404 days | 1% |
| joe Reibli | 10/10 | 5405 days | 1% |
| Hoogh | 9/10 | 5405 days | 1% |
| Pizzanelli | 5/10 | 5407 days | 1% |
| Jeannot Robert | 10/10 | 5418 days | 1% |
| Douglas Kirby | 6/10 | 5421 days | 1% |
| Gerry Donoghue | 7/10 | 5422 days | 1% |
| Colin Morbey | 8/10 | 5422 days | 1% |
| Bartlett nz | 7/10 | 5425 days | 1% |
| biene | 2/10 | 5454 days | 0% |
| annett | 2/10 | 5455 days | 0% |
| willemrn | 4/10 | 5455 days | 1% |
| mariak | 3/10 | 5456 days | 1% |
| nadinef | 7/10 | 5462 days | 1% |
| hofstetterf | 9/10 | 5468 days | 1% |
| katepat | 8/10 | 5470 days | 1% |
| carolineder | 5/10 | 5470 days | 1% |
| Anne Ford | 9/10 | 5472 days | 1% |
| Antje & Sascha Häusler | 5/10 | 5474 days | 1% |
| Chris Mackamul | 10/10 | 5477 days | 1% |
| Sibylle Locher | 9/10 | 5478 days | 1% |
| David D S | 6/10 | 5478 days | 1% |
| Kazmeister | 8/10 | 5500 days | 1% |
| Tracy & Peter Cassidy | 1/10 | 5509 days | 0% |
| katesh | 9/10 | 5669 days | 1% |
| BVanW | 5/10 | 5706 days | 1% |
| desl | 10/10 | 5714 days | 1% |
| Katy1 | 9/10 | 5716 days | 1% |
| Colin Heath | 2/10 | 5732 days | 0% |
| Marina | 5/10 | 5756 days | 1% |
| Nick | 9/10 | 5757 days | 1% |
| Joosten | 5/10 | 5760 days | 1% |
Adjustments
Several adjustments to the weighted average are added to improve relevancy and credibility. These adjustments apply equally to all experiences that meet the criteria.
Sample Size Adjustment
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 Wellington TOP 10 Holiday Park experience has plenty of reviews and does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
Recent Reviews Adjustment
-0.18% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 43 days. However the Wellington TOP 10 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 Wellington TOP 10 Holiday Park experience has been adjusted for 9 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 6 | -0.12% |
| 7 | -0.14% |
| 8 | -0.16% |
| 9 | -0.18% |
| 10 | -0.20% |
| 11 | -0.22% |
| 12 | -0.24% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
2.46% 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.
Final Ranking Score
85%
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.