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 Smiths Farm 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.
Smiths Farm Holiday Park
Valid Reviews
157 Valid Reviews
The Smiths Farm Holiday Park experience has a total of 159 reviews. There are 157 valid reviews that are included when calculating the ranking score and 2 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 157 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 115 |
|
73% |
| 9/10 | 27 |
|
17% |
| 8/10 | 13 |
|
8% |
| 7/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 6/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 5/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
96.11% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Smiths Farm Holiday Park valid reviews is 96.11% and is based on 157 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
29 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 157 valid reviews, the experience has 29 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 29 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 13 |
|
45% |
| 9/10 | 11 |
|
38% |
| 8/10 | 5 |
|
17% |
| 7/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 6/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 5/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
92.76% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Smiths Farm Holiday Park face-to-face reviews is 92.76% and is based on 29 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
97.69%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Scott Asplin | 10/10 | 219 days | 100% |
| Viktoria | 10/10 | 219 days | 100% |
| Steve | 9/10 | 308 days | 96% |
| EI | 10/10 | 400 days | 93% |
| Andi | 10/10 | 400 days | 93% |
| Hannah | 8/10 | 400 days | 92% |
| Joe | 10/10 | 431 days | 92% |
| Aragorn | 10/10 | 584 days | 83% |
| Thomas | 10/10 | 674 days | 76% |
| Pierre and Martine | 10/10 | 674 days | 76% |
| Mike Howe | 10/10 | 674 days | 76% |
| Sebastian | 10/10 | 705 days | 74% |
| Thomas & Annette | 10/10 | 736 days | 71% |
| Anna | 10/10 | 797 days | 66% |
| Zoe M | 10/10 | 797 days | 66% |
| Thomas Engelhardt | 10/10 | 827 days | 63% |
| RM | 10/10 | 889 days | 56% |
| Corinne | 8/10 | 950 days | 49% |
| ellie | 10/10 | 950 days | 50% |
| Brendan | 10/10 | 980 days | 47% |
| Steve | 10/10 | 1011 days | 44% |
| Milly | 10/10 | 1039 days | 41% |
| Sarah Woolley | 10/10 | 1039 days | 41% |
| Imme | 10/10 | 1070 days | 39% |
| Christian Wood | 10/10 | 1070 days | 39% |
| Kevin McCall | 10/10 | 1101 days | 36% |
| Ralph | 10/10 | 1466 days | 13% |
| Bex & Carl | 10/10 | 1466 days | 13% |
| Gem | 10/10 | 1496 days | 11% |
| Andrew | 10/10 | 1680 days | 6% |
| Kristine V | 10/10 | 1710 days | 6% |
| Barbora | 10/10 | 1769 days | 5% |
| Cloe | 10/10 | 1953 days | 5% |
| Kay | 8/10 | 2014 days | 5% |
| Isabella S | 10/10 | 2045 days | 5% |
| Elin Pranter | 10/10 | 2075 days | 5% |
| Zuzana and family | 10/10 | 2106 days | 5% |
| Just a guy | 10/10 | 2106 days | 5% |
| Liz Wade | 8/10 | 2134 days | 4% |
| Tom S | 10/10 | 2166 days | 4% |
| Erica | 8/10 | 2166 days | 4% |
| Dieter Giesen | 10/10 | 2166 days | 4% |
| Robert | 10/10 | 2197 days | 4% |
| Chris | 10/10 | 2197 days | 4% |
| Callum Mann | 10/10 | 2258 days | 4% |
| Martin Hansen | 10/10 | 2258 days | 4% |
| angelika19 | 10/10 | 2258 days | 4% |
| Anonymous | 10/10 | 2319 days | 4% |
| Anonymous | 10/10 | 2350 days | 4% |
| Nia | 9/10 | 2441 days | 4% |
| Maeike | 9/10 | 2472 days | 4% |
| Maika Laura | 10/10 | 2472 days | 4% |
| Axel & Sabine | 10/10 | 2472 days | 4% |
| Michael | 10/10 | 2500 days | 4% |
| Simone Maccagnan | 10/10 | 2531 days | 4% |
| Beate | 9/10 | 2531 days | 4% |
| Jonas and Lottie | 10/10 | 2562 days | 4% |
| Anita | 9/10 | 2562 days | 4% |
| Lance | 10/10 | 2592 days | 4% |
| Julia Thompson | 10/10 | 2592 days | 4% |
| Brett See | 10/10 | 2623 days | 3% |
| Grizzly Girl | 9/10 | 2623 days | 3% |
| kael Matthews | 9/10 | 2623 days | 3% |
| Kimberly | 10/10 | 2653 days | 3% |
| Jenna webber | 9/10 | 2653 days | 3% |
| Karina | 10/10 | 2837 days | 3% |
| Alde | 10/10 | 2837 days | 3% |
| The Weathersons | 9/10 | 2850 days | 2% |
| Tina Elsdon | 10/10 | 2895 days | 3% |
| Joanna du Toit | 9/10 | 2926 days | 3% |
| Nel Warnaar | 10/10 | 2932 days | 3% |
| Nigel Chapman | 10/10 | 2956 days | 3% |
| Craig Cini | 10/10 | 3021 days | 3% |
| Daniel Unkel | 10/10 | 3070 days | 3% |
| Eric Adelman | 10/10 | 3117 days | 2% |
| Jo Clarke | 8/10 | 3158 days | 2% |
| Jason Morehouse | 10/10 | 3201 days | 2% |
| Alan Brown | 5/10 | 3230 days | 2% |
| Matthias Wohlgemuth | 7/10 | 3244 days | 2% |
| Leilani Lemusu-Read | 10/10 | 3260 days | 2% |
| Kathrin Weigl | 10/10 | 3278 days | 2% |
| Yachar Tajamady | 10/10 | 3319 days | 2% |
| Tina Brill | 10/10 | 3352 days | 2% |
| Robert Ciarrocchi | 10/10 | 3420 days | 2% |
| Courtney | 10/10 | 3445 days | 2% |
| Cullen Wiginton | 10/10 | 3487 days | 2% |
| Alan Honey | 9/10 | 3517 days | 2% |
| Shaun Burns | 10/10 | 3525 days | 2% |
| Etienne Boeziek | 10/10 | 3529 days | 2% |
| Julia Clark | 9/10 | 3553 days | 2% |
| Sandra Kruse | 10/10 | 3555 days | 2% |
| Victoria Lee | 10/10 | 3635 days | 1% |
| Max Brunner | 10/10 | 3650 days | 1% |
| Hanna from Germany | 10/10 | 3662 days | 1% |
| Sarah Gurney | 10/10 | 3687 days | 1% |
| Ron Web | 10/10 | 3687 days | 1% |
| Claudius How | 10/10 | 3688 days | 1% |
| Jayne Lewis | 10/10 | 3688 days | 1% |
| Jade Duncan | 10/10 | 3706 days | 1% |
| Steve Warren | 10/10 | 3717 days | 1% |
| Megan | 10/10 | 3748 days | 1% |
| Nicolas Justin | 10/10 | 3923 days | 1% |
| Julia | 10/10 | 3932 days | 1% |
| John Wray | 10/10 | 3960 days | 1% |
| Constantin D | 10/10 | 3973 days | 1% |
| Jonathan Arndt | 10/10 | 3974 days | 1% |
| Virpi Andersson | 10/10 | 3991 days | 1% |
| Dieter Schmees | 9/10 | 4004 days | 0% |
| Manuela | 10/10 | 4019 days | 0% |
| Dieter & Lydia Schmees | 9/10 | 4022 days | 1% |
| Bert Snel | 10/10 | 4022 days | 1% |
| oren schnabel | 10/10 | 4022 days | 1% |
| SUE COLEMAN | 9/10 | 4022 days | 1% |
| Astrid Egesten | 9/10 | 4030 days | 0% |
| Gianpiero Rodari | 9/10 | 4052 days | 1% |
| sahni | 9/10 | 4237 days | 0% |
| Jan Legein | 10/10 | 4275 days | 0% |
| Josefin Lind | 9/10 | 4277 days | 0% |
| Herman Holmgist | 9/10 | 4277 days | 0% |
| Leeann Newton | 9/10 | 4324 days | 0% |
| Andrew Young | 10/10 | 4326 days | 0% |
| GN100 | 9/10 | 4326 days | 0% |
| Michael Turek | 10/10 | 4357 days | 0% |
| Linda Morey | 10/10 | 4357 days | 0% |
| Eric and Nienke | 8/10 | 4388 days | 1% |
| Julian Kemp | 10/10 | 4418 days | 1% |
| Steve Warren | 10/10 | 4449 days | 1% |
| PaulMacca | 10/10 | 4541 days | 1% |
| AoP | 10/10 | 4663 days | 1% |
| Penny Compton | 10/10 | 4663 days | 1% |
| Julian Roots | 8/10 | 4663 days | 1% |
| Helen and Ogi | 10/10 | 4676 days | 1% |
| Lis Bon | 10/10 | 4691 days | 1% |
| Pahlfamily | 10/10 | 4722 days | 1% |
| Joroen Borkert | 9/10 | 4740 days | 1% |
| Johannes OBerlin | 10/10 | 5025 days | 1% |
| Shavill | 10/10 | 5028 days | 1% |
| Michael Stoll | 10/10 | 5038 days | 1% |
| E Smudde | 8/10 | 5041 days | 1% |
| RhysWendy | 10/10 | 5088 days | 1% |
| Ken Jones | 9/10 | 5369 days | 1% |
| Steve Waterhouse | 8/10 | 5379 days | 1% |
| Jan Visser | 8/10 | 5394 days | 1% |
| Victoria Purver | 10/10 | 5397 days | 1% |
| Andrew Koster | 9/10 | 5407 days | 1% |
| Emma Edis-Bates | 9/10 | 5410 days | 1% |
| rhubarbsky | 10/10 | 5484 days | 1% |
| krisevelyn | 9/10 | 5698 days | 1% |
| Caitriona Doyle | 10/10 | 5781 days | 1% |
| Hanz | 10/10 | 5783 days | 1% |
| Linley Faulkner | 10/10 | 5787 days | 1% |
| EA Anders | 10/10 | 5804 days | 1% |
| Family van Hessem | 8/10 | 5807 days | 1% |
| Anna | 10/10 | 5857 days | 1% |
| Jessica Clarisse | 10/10 | 5861 days | 1% |
| Christine Suess | 10/10 | 5861 days | 1% |
| LindaV | 8/10 | 6127 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 Smiths Farm Holiday Park experience has plenty of reviews and does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
Recent Reviews Adjustment
-4.07% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 42 days. However the Smiths Farm 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 Smiths Farm Holiday Park experience has been adjusted for 200 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 197 | -4.01% |
| 198 | -4.03% |
| 199 | -4.05% |
| 200 | -4.07% |
| 201 | -4.09% |
| 202 | -4.11% |
| 203 | -4.13% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
0.57% 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
94%
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.