Kia ora, 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 Picton Tasman Holiday Parks.
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.
Picton Tasman Holiday Parks
Valid Reviews
139 Valid Reviews
The Picton Tasman Holiday Parks experience has a total of 140 reviews. There are 139 valid reviews that are included when calculating the ranking score and 1 invalid review 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 139 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 33 |
|
24% |
| 9/10 | 41 |
|
29% |
| 8/10 | 44 |
|
32% |
| 7/10 | 14 |
|
10% |
| 6/10 | 3 |
|
2% |
| 5/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 4/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 1/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
84.82% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Picton Tasman Holiday Parks valid reviews is 84.82% and is based on 139 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
101 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 139 valid reviews, the experience has 101 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 101 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 23 |
|
23% |
| 9/10 | 30 |
|
30% |
| 8/10 | 33 |
|
33% |
| 7/10 | 12 |
|
12% |
| 6/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 5/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 4/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
85.05% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Picton Tasman Holiday Parks face-to-face reviews is 85.05% and is based on 101 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
90.26%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rich | 9/10 | 199 days | 100% |
| Jason C | 10/10 | 261 days | 99% |
| Donna | 10/10 | 261 days | 99% |
| Aoife | 8/10 | 443 days | 90% |
| Laura | 9/10 | 1023 days | 43% |
| Ferg | 10/10 | 1023 days | 43% |
| Inge | 8/10 | 1082 days | 37% |
| Cindi Wight | 9/10 | 1143 days | 32% |
| Sarah | 8/10 | 1174 days | 30% |
| Alexis | 10/10 | 2025 days | 5% |
| Cody | 10/10 | 2118 days | 5% |
| Mike Smith | 7/10 | 2178 days | 4% |
| Beth Carlton | 1/10 | 2239 days | 2% |
| Christian | 10/10 | 2512 days | 4% |
| Emma | 9/10 | 2543 days | 4% |
| Demi Thompson | 6/10 | 2604 days | 3% |
| Brett See | 9/10 | 2635 days | 3% |
| Mike Fricker | 9/10 | 2635 days | 3% |
| Urs Bruderer | 10/10 | 3323 days | 2% |
| Leslie Lindeman | 10/10 | 3534 days | 2% |
| Ray Tombs | 9/10 | 3537 days | 2% |
| Phillippa McLernon | 8/10 | 3596 days | 2% |
| Tine Fook | 6/10 | 3632 days | 1% |
| Jan Towers | 8/10 | 4277 days | 0% |
| Brita Topp | 8/10 | 4279 days | 0% |
| Mike Fricker | 8/10 | 4279 days | 0% |
| Mark Towers | 8/10 | 4310 days | 0% |
| Rikke Petersen | 9/10 | 4328 days | 0% |
| Ted Cole | 8/10 | 4338 days | 0% |
| Nigel | 8/10 | 4345 days | 0% |
| catherine welsh | 8/10 | 4369 days | 0% |
| Nigel & Annie Dale | 8/10 | 4430 days | 1% |
| ozelmer | 6/10 | 4490 days | 1% |
| AusCampa | 9/10 | 4613 days | 1% |
| Mark Wiggington | 7/10 | 4638 days | 1% |
| Ken Milligan | 8/10 | 4662 days | 1% |
| Gale Willcocks | 10/10 | 4668 days | 1% |
| Ken Richardson | 8/10 | 4668 days | 1% |
| Heather Macdonald | 9/10 | 4703 days | 1% |
| Nadine | 9/10 | 4747 days | 1% |
| Robert Staeller | 8/10 | 4750 days | 1% |
| David and Sally Wallis | 9/10 | 4756 days | 1% |
| Jackie and Brian | 8/10 | 4757 days | 1% |
| Peter | 10/10 | 4758 days | 1% |
| Julia Ramseier | 10/10 | 4777 days | 1% |
| Lisa Blake | 8/10 | 4781 days | 1% |
| Ton Franke | 8/10 | 4781 days | 1% |
| Megan Child | 9/10 | 4782 days | 1% |
| Jonathan Tuthill | 10/10 | 5025 days | 1% |
| Carly Braddock | 10/10 | 5029 days | 1% |
| Def Fem | 8/10 | 5035 days | 1% |
| launch | 7/10 | 5040 days | 1% |
| Michael Jefferies | 9/10 | 5043 days | 1% |
| Mark Bogton | 9/10 | 5049 days | 1% |
| Dominik Langenegger | 10/10 | 5051 days | 1% |
| Moehl | 9/10 | 5052 days | 1% |
| D Collier | 10/10 | 5053 days | 1% |
| Uwe Henze | 8/10 | 5054 days | 1% |
| Ute Rogawski | 7/10 | 5061 days | 1% |
| Nikita Sue | 7/10 | 5062 days | 1% |
| Heewin Otten | 10/10 | 5062 days | 1% |
| D R Valentine | 10/10 | 5063 days | 1% |
| Andreas Kristiansen | 9/10 | 5063 days | 1% |
| Petra | 10/10 | 5064 days | 1% |
| John Reynolds | 10/10 | 5064 days | 1% |
| Katie K | 10/10 | 5078 days | 1% |
| ZephyrTL | 8/10 | 5100 days | 1% |
| Peter, Noelle & Susanne | 10/10 | 5134 days | 1% |
| John & Myra Sloan | 9/10 | 5140 days | 1% |
| Jan & Marian | 10/10 | 5143 days | 1% |
| Andy Lever | 9/10 | 5146 days | 1% |
| Peter Spooner | 8/10 | 5148 days | 1% |
| damaca | 9/10 | 5221 days | 1% |
| Tacksharp | 9/10 | 5283 days | 1% |
| Edward Marhi | 9/10 | 5371 days | 1% |
| Weez18 | 10/10 | 5375 days | 1% |
| de Smedt | 9/10 | 5378 days | 1% |
| Eric Grant | 8/10 | 5380 days | 1% |
| Koen Vanlede | 8/10 | 5392 days | 1% |
| Sue Top | 10/10 | 5393 days | 1% |
| Marty Fey | 5/10 | 5397 days | 1% |
| Gord Carnochan | 9/10 | 5407 days | 1% |
| Pam & Rob Tellwright | 8/10 | 5410 days | 1% |
| Derek Puplett | 9/10 | 5410 days | 1% |
| Callum Sibbald | 8/10 | 5410 days | 1% |
| Gerlach | 8/10 | 5411 days | 1% |
| Agnes McMillan | 10/10 | 5418 days | 1% |
| Jill Dean | 8/10 | 5421 days | 1% |
| Philipp Rau | 8/10 | 5425 days | 1% |
| Eva Stauderova | 10/10 | 5425 days | 1% |
| Annette Mogg | 10/10 | 5430 days | 1% |
| Andrew Hammond | 8/10 | 5557 days | 1% |
| Betty le Brech | 8/10 | 5753 days | 1% |
| Ed & Pat Mitchell | 9/10 | 5779 days | 1% |
| Sue Bennett | 7/10 | 5781 days | 1% |
| Dieter Groscurth | 8/10 | 5781 days | 1% |
| Liz Pursey | 9/10 | 5791 days | 1% |
| pvo plas | 8/10 | 5793 days | 1% |
| Hoogh | 9/10 | 5796 days | 1% |
| Carina Raeder | 8/10 | 5797 days | 1% |
| John Rylance | 10/10 | 5798 days | 1% |
| Lamb | 9/10 | 5798 days | 1% |
| Tonny | 9/10 | 5798 days | 1% |
| Tim | 7/10 | 5799 days | 1% |
| Allan Bond | 7/10 | 5805 days | 1% |
| uleugel | 9/10 | 5808 days | 1% |
| Jeannot Robert | 10/10 | 5809 days | 1% |
| Norbert Hainz | 8/10 | 5812 days | 1% |
| Heino keyssler | 10/10 | 5819 days | 1% |
| T S | 10/10 | 5830 days | 1% |
| eliertv | 9/10 | 5845 days | 1% |
| adamek | 7/10 | 5845 days | 1% |
| frederike | 8/10 | 5846 days | 1% |
| Karin Linder | 9/10 | 5865 days | 1% |
| Bue Verrept | 8/10 | 5868 days | 1% |
| Pia | 2/10 | 5872 days | 0% |
| Gebert | 8/10 | 5872 days | 1% |
| Daniel Alonso | 8/10 | 5873 days | 1% |
| Ana Garcia | 9/10 | 5874 days | 1% |
| Kelly | 10/10 | 6015 days | 1% |
| Johnnie | 8/10 | 6085 days | 1% |
| AndySwitzerland | 8/10 | 6088 days | 1% |
| suet | 7/10 | 6105 days | 1% |
| scottl | 7/10 | 6105 days | 1% |
| neeltjec | 9/10 | 6105 days | 1% |
| Martien van Brakel | 9/10 | 6105 days | 1% |
| BevanLisa | 8/10 | 6122 days | 1% |
| JeremyE | 8/10 | 6123 days | 1% |
| TessaW | 4/10 | 6123 days | 1% |
| LucyT | 10/10 | 6123 days | 1% |
| Florens | 8/10 | 6125 days | 1% |
| Joel | 7/10 | 6125 days | 1% |
| Tiemen | 7/10 | 6125 days | 1% |
| NikkiB1 | 9/10 | 6140 days | 1% |
| BrunoS | 9/10 | 6140 days | 1% |
| JoseB | 9/10 | 6147 days | 1% |
| Debbie | 9/10 | 6147 days | 1% |
| InkenGermany | 9/10 | 6147 days | 1% |
| John | 7/10 | 6154 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 Picton Tasman Holiday Parks experience has plenty of reviews and does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
Recent Reviews Adjustment
-3.68% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 42 days. However the Picton Tasman Holiday Parks 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 Picton Tasman Holiday Parks experience has been adjusted for 182 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 179 | -3.62% |
| 180 | -3.64% |
| 181 | -3.66% |
| 182 | -3.68% |
| 183 | -3.70% |
| 184 | -3.72% |
| 185 | -3.75% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
1.53% 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
88%
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.