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
151 Valid Reviews
The Smiths Farm Holiday Park experience has a total of 152 reviews. There are 151 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 151 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 111 |
|
74% |
| 9/10 | 26 |
|
17% |
| 8/10 | 12 |
|
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% |
96.16% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Smiths Farm Holiday Park valid reviews is 96.16% and is based on 151 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 151 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
98.70%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Joe | 10/10 | 31 days | 100% |
| Aragorn | 10/10 | 184 days | 98% |
| Thomas | 10/10 | 274 days | 96% |
| Pierre and Martine | 10/10 | 274 days | 96% |
| Mike Howe | 10/10 | 274 days | 96% |
| Sebastian | 10/10 | 305 days | 95% |
| Thomas & Annette | 10/10 | 336 days | 94% |
| Anna | 10/10 | 397 days | 91% |
| Zoe M | 10/10 | 397 days | 91% |
| Thomas Engelhardt | 10/10 | 427 days | 90% |
| RM | 10/10 | 489 days | 86% |
| Corinne | 8/10 | 550 days | 81% |
| ellie | 10/10 | 550 days | 83% |
| Brendan | 10/10 | 580 days | 81% |
| Steve | 10/10 | 611 days | 79% |
| Milly | 10/10 | 639 days | 77% |
| Sarah Woolley | 10/10 | 639 days | 77% |
| Imme | 10/10 | 670 days | 74% |
| Christian Wood | 10/10 | 670 days | 74% |
| Kevin McCall | 10/10 | 701 days | 72% |
| Ralph | 10/10 | 1066 days | 38% |
| Bex & Carl | 10/10 | 1066 days | 38% |
| Gem | 10/10 | 1096 days | 35% |
| Andrew | 10/10 | 1280 days | 22% |
| Kristine V | 10/10 | 1310 days | 20% |
| Barbora | 10/10 | 1369 days | 17% |
| Cloe | 10/10 | 1553 days | 9% |
| Kay | 8/10 | 1614 days | 7% |
| Isabella S | 10/10 | 1645 days | 7% |
| Elin Pranter | 10/10 | 1675 days | 6% |
| Zuzana and family | 10/10 | 1706 days | 6% |
| Just a guy | 10/10 | 1706 days | 6% |
| Liz Wade | 8/10 | 1734 days | 5% |
| Tom S | 10/10 | 1766 days | 5% |
| Erica | 8/10 | 1766 days | 5% |
| Dieter Giesen | 10/10 | 1766 days | 5% |
| Robert | 10/10 | 1797 days | 5% |
| Chris | 10/10 | 1797 days | 5% |
| Callum Mann | 10/10 | 1858 days | 5% |
| Martin Hansen | 10/10 | 1858 days | 5% |
| angelika19 | 10/10 | 1858 days | 5% |
| Anonymous | 10/10 | 1919 days | 5% |
| Anonymous | 10/10 | 1950 days | 5% |
| Nia | 9/10 | 2041 days | 4% |
| Maeike | 9/10 | 2072 days | 4% |
| Maika Laura | 10/10 | 2072 days | 4% |
| Axel & Sabine | 10/10 | 2072 days | 4% |
| Michael | 10/10 | 2100 days | 4% |
| Simone Maccagnan | 10/10 | 2131 days | 4% |
| Beate | 9/10 | 2131 days | 4% |
| Jonas and Lottie | 10/10 | 2162 days | 4% |
| Anita | 9/10 | 2162 days | 4% |
| Lance | 10/10 | 2192 days | 4% |
| Julia Thompson | 10/10 | 2192 days | 4% |
| Brett See | 10/10 | 2223 days | 4% |
| Grizzly Girl | 9/10 | 2223 days | 4% |
| kael Matthews | 9/10 | 2223 days | 4% |
| Kimberly | 10/10 | 2253 days | 4% |
| Jenna webber | 9/10 | 2253 days | 4% |
| Karina | 10/10 | 2437 days | 4% |
| Alde | 10/10 | 2437 days | 4% |
| The Weathersons | 9/10 | 2450 days | 3% |
| Tina Elsdon | 10/10 | 2495 days | 4% |
| Joanna du Toit | 9/10 | 2526 days | 4% |
| Nel Warnaar | 10/10 | 2532 days | 4% |
| Nigel Chapman | 10/10 | 2556 days | 3% |
| Craig Cini | 10/10 | 2621 days | 3% |
| Daniel Unkel | 10/10 | 2670 days | 3% |
| Eric Adelman | 10/10 | 2717 days | 3% |
| Jo Clarke | 8/10 | 2758 days | 3% |
| Jason Morehouse | 10/10 | 2801 days | 3% |
| Alan Brown | 5/10 | 2830 days | 2% |
| Matthias Wohlgemuth | 7/10 | 2844 days | 3% |
| Leilani Lemusu-Read | 10/10 | 2860 days | 3% |
| Kathrin Weigl | 10/10 | 2878 days | 3% |
| Yachar Tajamady | 10/10 | 2919 days | 3% |
| Tina Brill | 10/10 | 2952 days | 3% |
| Robert Ciarrocchi | 10/10 | 3020 days | 3% |
| Courtney | 10/10 | 3045 days | 3% |
| Cullen Wiginton | 10/10 | 3087 days | 2% |
| Alan Honey | 9/10 | 3117 days | 2% |
| Shaun Burns | 10/10 | 3125 days | 2% |
| Etienne Boeziek | 10/10 | 3129 days | 2% |
| Julia Clark | 9/10 | 3153 days | 2% |
| Sandra Kruse | 10/10 | 3155 days | 2% |
| Victoria Lee | 10/10 | 3235 days | 2% |
| Max Brunner | 10/10 | 3250 days | 2% |
| Hanna from Germany | 10/10 | 3262 days | 2% |
| Sarah Gurney | 10/10 | 3287 days | 2% |
| Ron Web | 10/10 | 3287 days | 2% |
| Claudius How | 10/10 | 3288 days | 2% |
| Jayne Lewis | 10/10 | 3288 days | 2% |
| Jade Duncan | 10/10 | 3306 days | 2% |
| Steve Warren | 10/10 | 3317 days | 2% |
| Megan | 10/10 | 3348 days | 2% |
| Nicolas Justin | 10/10 | 3523 days | 1% |
| Julia | 10/10 | 3532 days | 2% |
| John Wray | 10/10 | 3560 days | 2% |
| Constantin D | 10/10 | 3573 days | 2% |
| Jonathan Arndt | 10/10 | 3574 days | 2% |
| Virpi Andersson | 10/10 | 3591 days | 1% |
| Dieter Schmees | 9/10 | 3604 days | 1% |
| Manuela | 10/10 | 3619 days | 1% |
| Dieter & Lydia Schmees | 9/10 | 3622 days | 1% |
| Bert Snel | 10/10 | 3622 days | 1% |
| oren schnabel | 10/10 | 3622 days | 1% |
| SUE COLEMAN | 9/10 | 3622 days | 1% |
| Astrid Egesten | 9/10 | 3630 days | 1% |
| Gianpiero Rodari | 9/10 | 3652 days | 1% |
| sahni | 9/10 | 3837 days | 1% |
| Jan Legein | 10/10 | 3875 days | 1% |
| Josefin Lind | 9/10 | 3877 days | 1% |
| Herman Holmgist | 9/10 | 3877 days | 1% |
| Leeann Newton | 9/10 | 3924 days | 1% |
| Andrew Young | 10/10 | 3926 days | 1% |
| GN100 | 9/10 | 3926 days | 1% |
| Michael Turek | 10/10 | 3957 days | 1% |
| Linda Morey | 10/10 | 3957 days | 1% |
| Eric and Nienke | 8/10 | 3988 days | 1% |
| Julian Kemp | 10/10 | 4018 days | 1% |
| Steve Warren | 10/10 | 4049 days | 1% |
| PaulMacca | 10/10 | 4141 days | 0% |
| AoP | 10/10 | 4263 days | 0% |
| Penny Compton | 10/10 | 4263 days | 0% |
| Julian Roots | 8/10 | 4263 days | 0% |
| Helen and Ogi | 10/10 | 4276 days | 0% |
| Lis Bon | 10/10 | 4291 days | 0% |
| Pahlfamily | 10/10 | 4322 days | 0% |
| Joroen Borkert | 9/10 | 4340 days | 0% |
| Johannes OBerlin | 10/10 | 4625 days | 1% |
| Shavill | 10/10 | 4628 days | 1% |
| Michael Stoll | 10/10 | 4638 days | 1% |
| E Smudde | 8/10 | 4641 days | 1% |
| RhysWendy | 10/10 | 4688 days | 1% |
| Ken Jones | 9/10 | 4969 days | 1% |
| Steve Waterhouse | 8/10 | 4979 days | 1% |
| Jan Visser | 8/10 | 4994 days | 1% |
| Victoria Purver | 10/10 | 4997 days | 1% |
| Andrew Koster | 9/10 | 5007 days | 1% |
| Emma Edis-Bates | 9/10 | 5010 days | 1% |
| rhubarbsky | 10/10 | 5084 days | 1% |
| krisevelyn | 9/10 | 5298 days | 1% |
| Caitriona Doyle | 10/10 | 5381 days | 1% |
| Hanz | 10/10 | 5383 days | 1% |
| Linley Faulkner | 10/10 | 5387 days | 1% |
| EA Anders | 10/10 | 5404 days | 1% |
| Family van Hessem | 8/10 | 5407 days | 1% |
| Anna | 10/10 | 5457 days | 1% |
| Jessica Clarisse | 10/10 | 5461 days | 1% |
| Christine Suess | 10/10 | 5461 days | 1% |
| LindaV | 8/10 | 5727 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
-0.12% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 50 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 6 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 3 | -0.06% |
| 4 | -0.08% |
| 5 | -0.10% |
| 6 | -0.12% |
| 7 | -0.14% |
| 8 | -0.15% |
| 9 | -0.17% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
0.12% 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
99%
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.