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 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
90.25%
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 | 188 days | 100% |
| Jason C | 10/10 | 249 days | 99% |
| Donna | 10/10 | 249 days | 99% |
| Aoife | 8/10 | 431 days | 90% |
| Laura | 9/10 | 1011 days | 44% |
| Ferg | 10/10 | 1011 days | 44% |
| Inge | 8/10 | 1070 days | 38% |
| Cindi Wight | 9/10 | 1131 days | 33% |
| Sarah | 8/10 | 1162 days | 30% |
| Alexis | 10/10 | 2014 days | 5% |
| Cody | 10/10 | 2106 days | 5% |
| Mike Smith | 7/10 | 2166 days | 4% |
| Beth Carlton | 1/10 | 2227 days | 2% |
| Christian | 10/10 | 2500 days | 4% |
| Emma | 9/10 | 2531 days | 4% |
| Demi Thompson | 6/10 | 2592 days | 3% |
| Brett See | 9/10 | 2623 days | 3% |
| Mike Fricker | 9/10 | 2623 days | 3% |
| Urs Bruderer | 10/10 | 3311 days | 2% |
| Leslie Lindeman | 10/10 | 3523 days | 2% |
| Ray Tombs | 9/10 | 3526 days | 2% |
| Phillippa McLernon | 8/10 | 3584 days | 2% |
| Tine Fook | 6/10 | 3620 days | 1% |
| Jan Towers | 8/10 | 4265 days | 0% |
| Brita Topp | 8/10 | 4267 days | 0% |
| Mike Fricker | 8/10 | 4267 days | 0% |
| Mark Towers | 8/10 | 4298 days | 0% |
| Rikke Petersen | 9/10 | 4316 days | 0% |
| Ted Cole | 8/10 | 4326 days | 0% |
| Nigel | 8/10 | 4333 days | 0% |
| catherine welsh | 8/10 | 4357 days | 0% |
| Nigel & Annie Dale | 8/10 | 4418 days | 1% |
| ozelmer | 6/10 | 4479 days | 1% |
| AusCampa | 9/10 | 4602 days | 1% |
| Mark Wiggington | 7/10 | 4626 days | 1% |
| Ken Milligan | 8/10 | 4650 days | 1% |
| Gale Willcocks | 10/10 | 4656 days | 1% |
| Ken Richardson | 8/10 | 4656 days | 1% |
| Heather Macdonald | 9/10 | 4691 days | 1% |
| Nadine | 9/10 | 4735 days | 1% |
| Robert Staeller | 8/10 | 4738 days | 1% |
| David and Sally Wallis | 9/10 | 4744 days | 1% |
| Jackie and Brian | 8/10 | 4745 days | 1% |
| Peter | 10/10 | 4746 days | 1% |
| Julia Ramseier | 10/10 | 4765 days | 1% |
| Lisa Blake | 8/10 | 4769 days | 1% |
| Ton Franke | 8/10 | 4769 days | 1% |
| Megan Child | 9/10 | 4770 days | 1% |
| Jonathan Tuthill | 10/10 | 5013 days | 1% |
| Carly Braddock | 10/10 | 5017 days | 1% |
| Def Fem | 8/10 | 5023 days | 1% |
| launch | 7/10 | 5028 days | 1% |
| Michael Jefferies | 9/10 | 5031 days | 1% |
| Mark Bogton | 9/10 | 5037 days | 1% |
| Dominik Langenegger | 10/10 | 5039 days | 1% |
| Moehl | 9/10 | 5040 days | 1% |
| D Collier | 10/10 | 5041 days | 1% |
| Uwe Henze | 8/10 | 5042 days | 1% |
| Ute Rogawski | 7/10 | 5049 days | 1% |
| Nikita Sue | 7/10 | 5050 days | 1% |
| Heewin Otten | 10/10 | 5050 days | 1% |
| D R Valentine | 10/10 | 5051 days | 1% |
| Andreas Kristiansen | 9/10 | 5051 days | 1% |
| Petra | 10/10 | 5052 days | 1% |
| John Reynolds | 10/10 | 5052 days | 1% |
| Katie K | 10/10 | 5066 days | 1% |
| ZephyrTL | 8/10 | 5088 days | 1% |
| Peter, Noelle & Susanne | 10/10 | 5122 days | 1% |
| John & Myra Sloan | 9/10 | 5128 days | 1% |
| Jan & Marian | 10/10 | 5131 days | 1% |
| Andy Lever | 9/10 | 5134 days | 1% |
| Peter Spooner | 8/10 | 5136 days | 1% |
| damaca | 9/10 | 5210 days | 1% |
| Tacksharp | 9/10 | 5272 days | 1% |
| Edward Marhi | 9/10 | 5360 days | 1% |
| Weez18 | 10/10 | 5363 days | 1% |
| de Smedt | 9/10 | 5366 days | 1% |
| Eric Grant | 8/10 | 5368 days | 1% |
| Koen Vanlede | 8/10 | 5380 days | 1% |
| Sue Top | 10/10 | 5381 days | 1% |
| Marty Fey | 5/10 | 5385 days | 1% |
| Gord Carnochan | 9/10 | 5395 days | 1% |
| Pam & Rob Tellwright | 8/10 | 5398 days | 1% |
| Derek Puplett | 9/10 | 5398 days | 1% |
| Callum Sibbald | 8/10 | 5398 days | 1% |
| Gerlach | 8/10 | 5399 days | 1% |
| Agnes McMillan | 10/10 | 5406 days | 1% |
| Jill Dean | 8/10 | 5409 days | 1% |
| Philipp Rau | 8/10 | 5413 days | 1% |
| Eva Stauderova | 10/10 | 5413 days | 1% |
| Annette Mogg | 10/10 | 5418 days | 1% |
| Andrew Hammond | 8/10 | 5545 days | 1% |
| Betty le Brech | 8/10 | 5741 days | 1% |
| Ed & Pat Mitchell | 9/10 | 5767 days | 1% |
| Sue Bennett | 7/10 | 5769 days | 1% |
| Dieter Groscurth | 8/10 | 5769 days | 1% |
| Liz Pursey | 9/10 | 5779 days | 1% |
| pvo plas | 8/10 | 5781 days | 1% |
| Hoogh | 9/10 | 5784 days | 1% |
| Carina Raeder | 8/10 | 5785 days | 1% |
| John Rylance | 10/10 | 5786 days | 1% |
| Lamb | 9/10 | 5786 days | 1% |
| Tonny | 9/10 | 5786 days | 1% |
| Tim | 7/10 | 5787 days | 1% |
| Allan Bond | 7/10 | 5793 days | 1% |
| uleugel | 9/10 | 5796 days | 1% |
| Jeannot Robert | 10/10 | 5797 days | 1% |
| Norbert Hainz | 8/10 | 5800 days | 1% |
| Heino keyssler | 10/10 | 5807 days | 1% |
| T S | 10/10 | 5818 days | 1% |
| eliertv | 9/10 | 5833 days | 1% |
| adamek | 7/10 | 5833 days | 1% |
| frederike | 8/10 | 5834 days | 1% |
| Karin Linder | 9/10 | 5853 days | 1% |
| Bue Verrept | 8/10 | 5856 days | 1% |
| Pia | 2/10 | 5860 days | 0% |
| Gebert | 8/10 | 5860 days | 1% |
| Daniel Alonso | 8/10 | 5861 days | 1% |
| Ana Garcia | 9/10 | 5862 days | 1% |
| Kelly | 10/10 | 6004 days | 1% |
| Johnnie | 8/10 | 6074 days | 1% |
| AndySwitzerland | 8/10 | 6077 days | 1% |
| suet | 7/10 | 6093 days | 1% |
| scottl | 7/10 | 6093 days | 1% |
| neeltjec | 9/10 | 6093 days | 1% |
| Martien van Brakel | 9/10 | 6093 days | 1% |
| BevanLisa | 8/10 | 6110 days | 1% |
| JeremyE | 8/10 | 6111 days | 1% |
| TessaW | 4/10 | 6111 days | 1% |
| LucyT | 10/10 | 6111 days | 1% |
| Florens | 8/10 | 6113 days | 1% |
| Joel | 7/10 | 6113 days | 1% |
| Tiemen | 7/10 | 6113 days | 1% |
| NikkiB1 | 9/10 | 6128 days | 1% |
| BrunoS | 9/10 | 6128 days | 1% |
| JoseB | 9/10 | 6135 days | 1% |
| Debbie | 9/10 | 6135 days | 1% |
| InkenGermany | 9/10 | 6135 days | 1% |
| John | 7/10 | 6142 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
-3.48% 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 171 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 168 | -3.42% |
| 169 | -3.44% |
| 170 | -3.46% |
| 171 | -3.48% |
| 172 | -3.50% |
| 173 | -3.52% |
| 174 | -3.54% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
1.49% 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.