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
86.35%
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 | 26 days | 100% |
| Laura | 9/10 | 606 days | 80% |
| Ferg | 10/10 | 606 days | 81% |
| Inge | 8/10 | 665 days | 75% |
| Cindi Wight | 9/10 | 726 days | 71% |
| Sarah | 8/10 | 757 days | 67% |
| Alexis | 10/10 | 1609 days | 8% |
| Cody | 10/10 | 1701 days | 6% |
| Mike Smith | 7/10 | 1761 days | 5% |
| Beth Carlton | 1/10 | 1822 days | 2% |
| Christian | 10/10 | 2095 days | 5% |
| Emma | 9/10 | 2126 days | 4% |
| Demi Thompson | 6/10 | 2187 days | 4% |
| Brett See | 9/10 | 2218 days | 4% |
| Mike Fricker | 9/10 | 2218 days | 4% |
| Urs Bruderer | 10/10 | 2906 days | 3% |
| Leslie Lindeman | 10/10 | 3118 days | 2% |
| Ray Tombs | 9/10 | 3121 days | 2% |
| Phillippa McLernon | 8/10 | 3179 days | 2% |
| Tine Fook | 6/10 | 3215 days | 2% |
| Jan Towers | 8/10 | 3860 days | 1% |
| Brita Topp | 8/10 | 3862 days | 1% |
| Mike Fricker | 8/10 | 3862 days | 1% |
| Mark Towers | 8/10 | 3893 days | 1% |
| Rikke Petersen | 9/10 | 3911 days | 1% |
| Ted Cole | 8/10 | 3921 days | 1% |
| Nigel | 8/10 | 3928 days | 1% |
| catherine welsh | 8/10 | 3952 days | 1% |
| Nigel & Annie Dale | 8/10 | 4013 days | 1% |
| ozelmer | 6/10 | 4074 days | 0% |
| AusCampa | 9/10 | 4197 days | 0% |
| Mark Wiggington | 7/10 | 4221 days | 0% |
| Ken Milligan | 8/10 | 4245 days | 0% |
| Gale Willcocks | 10/10 | 4251 days | 0% |
| Ken Richardson | 8/10 | 4251 days | 0% |
| Heather Macdonald | 9/10 | 4286 days | 0% |
| Nadine | 9/10 | 4330 days | 0% |
| Robert Staeller | 8/10 | 4333 days | 0% |
| David and Sally Wallis | 9/10 | 4339 days | 0% |
| Jackie and Brian | 8/10 | 4340 days | 0% |
| Peter | 10/10 | 4341 days | 0% |
| Julia Ramseier | 10/10 | 4360 days | 0% |
| Lisa Blake | 8/10 | 4364 days | 0% |
| Ton Franke | 8/10 | 4364 days | 0% |
| Megan Child | 9/10 | 4365 days | 0% |
| Jonathan Tuthill | 10/10 | 4608 days | 1% |
| Carly Braddock | 10/10 | 4612 days | 1% |
| Def Fem | 8/10 | 4618 days | 1% |
| launch | 7/10 | 4623 days | 1% |
| Michael Jefferies | 9/10 | 4626 days | 1% |
| Mark Bogton | 9/10 | 4632 days | 1% |
| Dominik Langenegger | 10/10 | 4634 days | 1% |
| Moehl | 9/10 | 4635 days | 1% |
| D Collier | 10/10 | 4636 days | 1% |
| Uwe Henze | 8/10 | 4637 days | 1% |
| Ute Rogawski | 7/10 | 4644 days | 1% |
| Nikita Sue | 7/10 | 4645 days | 1% |
| Heewin Otten | 10/10 | 4645 days | 1% |
| D R Valentine | 10/10 | 4646 days | 1% |
| Andreas Kristiansen | 9/10 | 4646 days | 1% |
| Petra | 10/10 | 4647 days | 1% |
| John Reynolds | 10/10 | 4647 days | 1% |
| Katie K | 10/10 | 4661 days | 1% |
| ZephyrTL | 8/10 | 4683 days | 1% |
| Peter, Noelle & Susanne | 10/10 | 4717 days | 1% |
| John & Myra Sloan | 9/10 | 4723 days | 1% |
| Jan & Marian | 10/10 | 4726 days | 1% |
| Andy Lever | 9/10 | 4729 days | 1% |
| Peter Spooner | 8/10 | 4731 days | 1% |
| damaca | 9/10 | 4805 days | 1% |
| Tacksharp | 9/10 | 4867 days | 1% |
| Edward Marhi | 9/10 | 4955 days | 1% |
| Weez18 | 10/10 | 4958 days | 1% |
| de Smedt | 9/10 | 4961 days | 1% |
| Eric Grant | 8/10 | 4963 days | 1% |
| Koen Vanlede | 8/10 | 4975 days | 1% |
| Sue Top | 10/10 | 4976 days | 1% |
| Marty Fey | 5/10 | 4980 days | 1% |
| Gord Carnochan | 9/10 | 4990 days | 1% |
| Pam & Rob Tellwright | 8/10 | 4993 days | 1% |
| Derek Puplett | 9/10 | 4993 days | 1% |
| Callum Sibbald | 8/10 | 4993 days | 1% |
| Gerlach | 8/10 | 4994 days | 1% |
| Agnes McMillan | 10/10 | 5001 days | 1% |
| Jill Dean | 8/10 | 5004 days | 1% |
| Philipp Rau | 8/10 | 5008 days | 1% |
| Eva Stauderova | 10/10 | 5008 days | 1% |
| Annette Mogg | 10/10 | 5013 days | 1% |
| Andrew Hammond | 8/10 | 5140 days | 1% |
| Betty le Brech | 8/10 | 5336 days | 1% |
| Ed & Pat Mitchell | 9/10 | 5362 days | 1% |
| Sue Bennett | 7/10 | 5364 days | 1% |
| Dieter Groscurth | 8/10 | 5364 days | 1% |
| Liz Pursey | 9/10 | 5374 days | 1% |
| pvo plas | 8/10 | 5376 days | 1% |
| Hoogh | 9/10 | 5379 days | 1% |
| Carina Raeder | 8/10 | 5380 days | 1% |
| John Rylance | 10/10 | 5381 days | 1% |
| Lamb | 9/10 | 5381 days | 1% |
| Tonny | 9/10 | 5381 days | 1% |
| Tim | 7/10 | 5382 days | 1% |
| Allan Bond | 7/10 | 5388 days | 1% |
| uleugel | 9/10 | 5391 days | 1% |
| Jeannot Robert | 10/10 | 5392 days | 1% |
| Norbert Hainz | 8/10 | 5395 days | 1% |
| Heino keyssler | 10/10 | 5402 days | 1% |
| T S | 10/10 | 5413 days | 1% |
| eliertv | 9/10 | 5428 days | 1% |
| adamek | 7/10 | 5428 days | 1% |
| frederike | 8/10 | 5429 days | 1% |
| Karin Linder | 9/10 | 5448 days | 1% |
| Bue Verrept | 8/10 | 5451 days | 1% |
| Pia | 2/10 | 5455 days | 0% |
| Gebert | 8/10 | 5455 days | 1% |
| Daniel Alonso | 8/10 | 5456 days | 1% |
| Ana Garcia | 9/10 | 5457 days | 1% |
| Kelly | 10/10 | 5599 days | 1% |
| Johnnie | 8/10 | 5669 days | 1% |
| AndySwitzerland | 8/10 | 5672 days | 1% |
| suet | 7/10 | 5688 days | 1% |
| scottl | 7/10 | 5688 days | 1% |
| neeltjec | 9/10 | 5688 days | 1% |
| Martien van Brakel | 9/10 | 5688 days | 1% |
| BevanLisa | 8/10 | 5705 days | 1% |
| JeremyE | 8/10 | 5706 days | 1% |
| TessaW | 4/10 | 5706 days | 1% |
| LucyT | 10/10 | 5706 days | 1% |
| Florens | 8/10 | 5708 days | 1% |
| Joel | 7/10 | 5708 days | 1% |
| Tiemen | 7/10 | 5708 days | 1% |
| NikkiB1 | 9/10 | 5723 days | 1% |
| BrunoS | 9/10 | 5723 days | 1% |
| JoseB | 9/10 | 5730 days | 1% |
| Debbie | 9/10 | 5730 days | 1% |
| InkenGermany | 9/10 | 5730 days | 1% |
| John | 7/10 | 5737 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
-0.30% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 52 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 16 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 13 | -0.25% |
| 14 | -0.27% |
| 15 | -0.28% |
| 16 | -0.30% |
| 17 | -0.32% |
| 18 | -0.34% |
| 19 | -0.36% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
1.63% 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.