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 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
136 Valid Reviews
The Picton Tasman Holiday Parks experience has a total of 137 reviews. There are 136 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 136 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 31 |
|
23% |
| 9/10 | 40 |
|
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% |
84.56% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Picton Tasman Holiday Parks valid reviews is 84.56% and is based on 136 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 136 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
86.33%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aoife | 8/10 | 65 days | 100% |
| Laura | 9/10 | 645 days | 77% |
| Ferg | 10/10 | 645 days | 78% |
| Inge | 8/10 | 704 days | 72% |
| Cindi Wight | 9/10 | 765 days | 67% |
| Sarah | 8/10 | 796 days | 64% |
| Alexis | 10/10 | 1648 days | 7% |
| Cody | 10/10 | 1740 days | 6% |
| Mike Smith | 7/10 | 1800 days | 5% |
| Beth Carlton | 1/10 | 1861 days | 2% |
| Christian | 10/10 | 2134 days | 4% |
| Emma | 9/10 | 2165 days | 4% |
| Demi Thompson | 6/10 | 2226 days | 4% |
| Brett See | 9/10 | 2257 days | 4% |
| Mike Fricker | 9/10 | 2257 days | 4% |
| Urs Bruderer | 10/10 | 2945 days | 3% |
| Leslie Lindeman | 10/10 | 3157 days | 2% |
| Ray Tombs | 9/10 | 3160 days | 2% |
| Phillippa McLernon | 8/10 | 3218 days | 2% |
| Tine Fook | 6/10 | 3254 days | 2% |
| Jan Towers | 8/10 | 3899 days | 1% |
| Brita Topp | 8/10 | 3901 days | 1% |
| Mike Fricker | 8/10 | 3901 days | 1% |
| Mark Towers | 8/10 | 3932 days | 1% |
| Rikke Petersen | 9/10 | 3950 days | 1% |
| Ted Cole | 8/10 | 3960 days | 1% |
| Nigel | 8/10 | 3967 days | 1% |
| catherine welsh | 8/10 | 3991 days | 1% |
| Nigel & Annie Dale | 8/10 | 4052 days | 1% |
| ozelmer | 6/10 | 4113 days | 0% |
| AusCampa | 9/10 | 4236 days | 0% |
| Mark Wiggington | 7/10 | 4260 days | 0% |
| Ken Milligan | 8/10 | 4284 days | 0% |
| Gale Willcocks | 10/10 | 4290 days | 0% |
| Ken Richardson | 8/10 | 4290 days | 0% |
| Heather Macdonald | 9/10 | 4325 days | 0% |
| Nadine | 9/10 | 4369 days | 0% |
| Robert Staeller | 8/10 | 4372 days | 0% |
| David and Sally Wallis | 9/10 | 4378 days | 0% |
| Jackie and Brian | 8/10 | 4379 days | 0% |
| Peter | 10/10 | 4380 days | 1% |
| Julia Ramseier | 10/10 | 4399 days | 1% |
| Lisa Blake | 8/10 | 4403 days | 1% |
| Ton Franke | 8/10 | 4403 days | 1% |
| Megan Child | 9/10 | 4404 days | 1% |
| Jonathan Tuthill | 10/10 | 4647 days | 1% |
| Carly Braddock | 10/10 | 4651 days | 1% |
| Def Fem | 8/10 | 4657 days | 1% |
| launch | 7/10 | 4662 days | 1% |
| Michael Jefferies | 9/10 | 4665 days | 1% |
| Mark Bogton | 9/10 | 4671 days | 1% |
| Dominik Langenegger | 10/10 | 4673 days | 1% |
| Moehl | 9/10 | 4674 days | 1% |
| D Collier | 10/10 | 4675 days | 1% |
| Uwe Henze | 8/10 | 4676 days | 1% |
| Ute Rogawski | 7/10 | 4683 days | 1% |
| Nikita Sue | 7/10 | 4684 days | 1% |
| Heewin Otten | 10/10 | 4684 days | 1% |
| D R Valentine | 10/10 | 4685 days | 1% |
| Andreas Kristiansen | 9/10 | 4685 days | 1% |
| Petra | 10/10 | 4686 days | 1% |
| John Reynolds | 10/10 | 4686 days | 1% |
| Katie K | 10/10 | 4700 days | 1% |
| ZephyrTL | 8/10 | 4722 days | 1% |
| Peter, Noelle & Susanne | 10/10 | 4756 days | 1% |
| John & Myra Sloan | 9/10 | 4762 days | 1% |
| Jan & Marian | 10/10 | 4765 days | 1% |
| Andy Lever | 9/10 | 4768 days | 1% |
| Peter Spooner | 8/10 | 4770 days | 1% |
| damaca | 9/10 | 4844 days | 1% |
| Tacksharp | 9/10 | 4906 days | 1% |
| Edward Marhi | 9/10 | 4994 days | 1% |
| Weez18 | 10/10 | 4997 days | 1% |
| de Smedt | 9/10 | 5000 days | 1% |
| Eric Grant | 8/10 | 5002 days | 1% |
| Koen Vanlede | 8/10 | 5014 days | 1% |
| Sue Top | 10/10 | 5015 days | 1% |
| Marty Fey | 5/10 | 5019 days | 1% |
| Gord Carnochan | 9/10 | 5029 days | 1% |
| Pam & Rob Tellwright | 8/10 | 5032 days | 1% |
| Derek Puplett | 9/10 | 5032 days | 1% |
| Callum Sibbald | 8/10 | 5032 days | 1% |
| Gerlach | 8/10 | 5033 days | 1% |
| Agnes McMillan | 10/10 | 5040 days | 1% |
| Jill Dean | 8/10 | 5043 days | 1% |
| Philipp Rau | 8/10 | 5047 days | 1% |
| Eva Stauderova | 10/10 | 5047 days | 1% |
| Annette Mogg | 10/10 | 5052 days | 1% |
| Andrew Hammond | 8/10 | 5179 days | 1% |
| Betty le Brech | 8/10 | 5375 days | 1% |
| Ed & Pat Mitchell | 9/10 | 5401 days | 1% |
| Sue Bennett | 7/10 | 5403 days | 1% |
| Dieter Groscurth | 8/10 | 5403 days | 1% |
| Liz Pursey | 9/10 | 5413 days | 1% |
| pvo plas | 8/10 | 5415 days | 1% |
| Hoogh | 9/10 | 5418 days | 1% |
| Carina Raeder | 8/10 | 5419 days | 1% |
| John Rylance | 10/10 | 5420 days | 1% |
| Lamb | 9/10 | 5420 days | 1% |
| Tonny | 9/10 | 5420 days | 1% |
| Tim | 7/10 | 5421 days | 1% |
| Allan Bond | 7/10 | 5427 days | 1% |
| uleugel | 9/10 | 5430 days | 1% |
| Jeannot Robert | 10/10 | 5431 days | 1% |
| Norbert Hainz | 8/10 | 5434 days | 1% |
| Heino keyssler | 10/10 | 5441 days | 1% |
| T S | 10/10 | 5452 days | 1% |
| eliertv | 9/10 | 5467 days | 1% |
| adamek | 7/10 | 5467 days | 1% |
| frederike | 8/10 | 5468 days | 1% |
| Karin Linder | 9/10 | 5487 days | 1% |
| Bue Verrept | 8/10 | 5490 days | 1% |
| Pia | 2/10 | 5494 days | 0% |
| Gebert | 8/10 | 5494 days | 1% |
| Daniel Alonso | 8/10 | 5495 days | 1% |
| Ana Garcia | 9/10 | 5496 days | 1% |
| Kelly | 10/10 | 5638 days | 1% |
| Johnnie | 8/10 | 5708 days | 1% |
| AndySwitzerland | 8/10 | 5711 days | 1% |
| suet | 7/10 | 5727 days | 1% |
| scottl | 7/10 | 5727 days | 1% |
| neeltjec | 9/10 | 5727 days | 1% |
| Martien van Brakel | 9/10 | 5727 days | 1% |
| BevanLisa | 8/10 | 5744 days | 1% |
| JeremyE | 8/10 | 5745 days | 1% |
| TessaW | 4/10 | 5745 days | 1% |
| LucyT | 10/10 | 5745 days | 1% |
| Florens | 8/10 | 5747 days | 1% |
| Joel | 7/10 | 5747 days | 1% |
| Tiemen | 7/10 | 5747 days | 1% |
| NikkiB1 | 9/10 | 5762 days | 1% |
| BrunoS | 9/10 | 5762 days | 1% |
| JoseB | 9/10 | 5769 days | 1% |
| Debbie | 9/10 | 5769 days | 1% |
| InkenGermany | 9/10 | 5769 days | 1% |
| John | 7/10 | 5776 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
-1.12% 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 55 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 52 | -1.06% |
| 53 | -1.08% |
| 54 | -1.10% |
| 55 | -1.12% |
| 56 | -1.14% |
| 57 | -1.16% |
| 58 | -1.18% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
1.78% 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
87%
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.