Hi, 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.
![](data:image/svg+xml;utf8,<svg width="300" height="300" viewBox="0 0 300 300" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg"><rect id="bg" width="300" height="300" fill="rgb(46,196,145)" /><path d="m 150 605 Q 206 94 -305 150 Q 206 206 150 -305 Q 94 206 605 150 Q 94 94 150 605 z" fill="rgb(70,136,0)" /><path d="m 150 515 Q 296 4 -215 150 Q 296 296 150 -215 Q 4 296 515 150 Q 4 4 150 515 z" fill="rgb(185,119,255)" /><path d="m 150 176 Q 165 135 124 150 Q 165 165 150 124 Q 135 165 176 150 Q 135 135 150 176 z" fill="rgb(209,59,110)" /></svg>)
Smiths Farm Holiday Park
Valid Reviews
155 Valid Reviews
The Smiths Farm Holiday Park experience has a total of 157 reviews. There are 155 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 155 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 113 |
|
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% |
96.06% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Smiths Farm Holiday Park valid reviews is 96.06% and is based on 155 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 155 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
97.65%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Steve | 9/10 | 73 days | 100% |
| EI | 10/10 | 165 days | 100% |
| Andi | 10/10 | 165 days | 100% |
| Hannah | 8/10 | 165 days | 98% |
| Joe | 10/10 | 196 days | 99% |
| Aragorn | 10/10 | 349 days | 94% |
| Thomas | 10/10 | 439 days | 90% |
| Pierre and Martine | 10/10 | 439 days | 90% |
| Mike Howe | 10/10 | 439 days | 90% |
| Sebastian | 10/10 | 470 days | 89% |
| Thomas & Annette | 10/10 | 501 days | 87% |
| Anna | 10/10 | 562 days | 83% |
| Zoe M | 10/10 | 562 days | 83% |
| Thomas Engelhardt | 10/10 | 592 days | 81% |
| RM | 10/10 | 654 days | 77% |
| Corinne | 8/10 | 715 days | 70% |
| ellie | 10/10 | 715 days | 72% |
| Brendan | 10/10 | 745 days | 69% |
| Steve | 10/10 | 776 days | 66% |
| Milly | 10/10 | 804 days | 64% |
| Sarah Woolley | 10/10 | 804 days | 64% |
| Imme | 10/10 | 835 days | 61% |
| Christian Wood | 10/10 | 835 days | 61% |
| Kevin McCall | 10/10 | 866 days | 58% |
| Ralph | 10/10 | 1231 days | 25% |
| Bex & Carl | 10/10 | 1231 days | 25% |
| Gem | 10/10 | 1261 days | 23% |
| Andrew | 10/10 | 1445 days | 13% |
| Kristine V | 10/10 | 1475 days | 12% |
| Barbora | 10/10 | 1534 days | 10% |
| Cloe | 10/10 | 1718 days | 6% |
| Kay | 8/10 | 1779 days | 5% |
| Isabella S | 10/10 | 1810 days | 5% |
| Elin Pranter | 10/10 | 1840 days | 5% |
| Zuzana and family | 10/10 | 1871 days | 5% |
| Just a guy | 10/10 | 1871 days | 5% |
| Liz Wade | 8/10 | 1899 days | 5% |
| Tom S | 10/10 | 1931 days | 5% |
| Erica | 8/10 | 1931 days | 5% |
| Dieter Giesen | 10/10 | 1931 days | 5% |
| Robert | 10/10 | 1962 days | 5% |
| Chris | 10/10 | 1962 days | 5% |
| Callum Mann | 10/10 | 2023 days | 5% |
| Martin Hansen | 10/10 | 2023 days | 5% |
| angelika19 | 10/10 | 2023 days | 5% |
| Anonymous | 10/10 | 2084 days | 4% |
| Anonymous | 10/10 | 2115 days | 4% |
| Nia | 9/10 | 2206 days | 4% |
| Maeike | 9/10 | 2237 days | 4% |
| Maika Laura | 10/10 | 2237 days | 4% |
| Axel & Sabine | 10/10 | 2237 days | 4% |
| Michael | 10/10 | 2265 days | 4% |
| Simone Maccagnan | 10/10 | 2296 days | 4% |
| Beate | 9/10 | 2296 days | 4% |
| Jonas and Lottie | 10/10 | 2327 days | 4% |
| Anita | 9/10 | 2327 days | 4% |
| Lance | 10/10 | 2357 days | 4% |
| Julia Thompson | 10/10 | 2357 days | 4% |
| Brett See | 10/10 | 2388 days | 4% |
| Grizzly Girl | 9/10 | 2388 days | 4% |
| kael Matthews | 9/10 | 2388 days | 4% |
| Kimberly | 10/10 | 2418 days | 4% |
| Jenna webber | 9/10 | 2418 days | 4% |
| Karina | 10/10 | 2602 days | 3% |
| Alde | 10/10 | 2602 days | 3% |
| The Weathersons | 9/10 | 2615 days | 2% |
| Tina Elsdon | 10/10 | 2660 days | 3% |
| Joanna du Toit | 9/10 | 2691 days | 3% |
| Nel Warnaar | 10/10 | 2697 days | 3% |
| Nigel Chapman | 10/10 | 2721 days | 3% |
| Craig Cini | 10/10 | 2786 days | 3% |
| Daniel Unkel | 10/10 | 2835 days | 3% |
| Eric Adelman | 10/10 | 2882 days | 3% |
| Jo Clarke | 8/10 | 2923 days | 3% |
| Jason Morehouse | 10/10 | 2966 days | 3% |
| Alan Brown | 5/10 | 2995 days | 2% |
| Matthias Wohlgemuth | 7/10 | 3009 days | 2% |
| Leilani Lemusu-Read | 10/10 | 3025 days | 3% |
| Kathrin Weigl | 10/10 | 3043 days | 3% |
| Yachar Tajamady | 10/10 | 3084 days | 2% |
| Tina Brill | 10/10 | 3117 days | 2% |
| Robert Ciarrocchi | 10/10 | 3185 days | 2% |
| Courtney | 10/10 | 3210 days | 2% |
| Cullen Wiginton | 10/10 | 3252 days | 2% |
| Alan Honey | 9/10 | 3282 days | 2% |
| Shaun Burns | 10/10 | 3290 days | 2% |
| Etienne Boeziek | 10/10 | 3294 days | 2% |
| Julia Clark | 9/10 | 3318 days | 2% |
| Sandra Kruse | 10/10 | 3320 days | 2% |
| Victoria Lee | 10/10 | 3400 days | 2% |
| Max Brunner | 10/10 | 3415 days | 2% |
| Hanna from Germany | 10/10 | 3427 days | 2% |
| Sarah Gurney | 10/10 | 3452 days | 2% |
| Ron Web | 10/10 | 3452 days | 2% |
| Claudius How | 10/10 | 3453 days | 2% |
| Jayne Lewis | 10/10 | 3453 days | 2% |
| Jade Duncan | 10/10 | 3471 days | 2% |
| Steve Warren | 10/10 | 3482 days | 2% |
| Megan | 10/10 | 3513 days | 2% |
| Nicolas Justin | 10/10 | 3688 days | 1% |
| Julia | 10/10 | 3697 days | 1% |
| John Wray | 10/10 | 3725 days | 1% |
| Constantin D | 10/10 | 3738 days | 1% |
| Jonathan Arndt | 10/10 | 3739 days | 1% |
| Virpi Andersson | 10/10 | 3756 days | 1% |
| Dieter Schmees | 9/10 | 3769 days | 1% |
| Manuela | 10/10 | 3784 days | 1% |
| Dieter & Lydia Schmees | 9/10 | 3787 days | 1% |
| Bert Snel | 10/10 | 3787 days | 1% |
| oren schnabel | 10/10 | 3787 days | 1% |
| SUE COLEMAN | 9/10 | 3787 days | 1% |
| Astrid Egesten | 9/10 | 3795 days | 1% |
| Gianpiero Rodari | 9/10 | 3817 days | 1% |
| sahni | 9/10 | 4002 days | 1% |
| Jan Legein | 10/10 | 4040 days | 0% |
| Josefin Lind | 9/10 | 4042 days | 0% |
| Herman Holmgist | 9/10 | 4042 days | 0% |
| Leeann Newton | 9/10 | 4089 days | 0% |
| Andrew Young | 10/10 | 4091 days | 0% |
| GN100 | 9/10 | 4091 days | 0% |
| Michael Turek | 10/10 | 4122 days | 0% |
| Linda Morey | 10/10 | 4122 days | 0% |
| Eric and Nienke | 8/10 | 4153 days | 0% |
| Julian Kemp | 10/10 | 4183 days | 0% |
| Steve Warren | 10/10 | 4214 days | 0% |
| PaulMacca | 10/10 | 4306 days | 0% |
| AoP | 10/10 | 4428 days | 1% |
| Penny Compton | 10/10 | 4428 days | 1% |
| Julian Roots | 8/10 | 4428 days | 1% |
| Helen and Ogi | 10/10 | 4441 days | 1% |
| Lis Bon | 10/10 | 4456 days | 1% |
| Pahlfamily | 10/10 | 4487 days | 1% |
| Joroen Borkert | 9/10 | 4505 days | 1% |
| Johannes OBerlin | 10/10 | 4790 days | 1% |
| Shavill | 10/10 | 4793 days | 1% |
| Michael Stoll | 10/10 | 4803 days | 1% |
| E Smudde | 8/10 | 4806 days | 1% |
| RhysWendy | 10/10 | 4853 days | 1% |
| Ken Jones | 9/10 | 5134 days | 1% |
| Steve Waterhouse | 8/10 | 5144 days | 1% |
| Jan Visser | 8/10 | 5159 days | 1% |
| Victoria Purver | 10/10 | 5162 days | 1% |
| Andrew Koster | 9/10 | 5172 days | 1% |
| Emma Edis-Bates | 9/10 | 5175 days | 1% |
| rhubarbsky | 10/10 | 5249 days | 1% |
| krisevelyn | 9/10 | 5463 days | 1% |
| Caitriona Doyle | 10/10 | 5546 days | 1% |
| Hanz | 10/10 | 5548 days | 1% |
| Linley Faulkner | 10/10 | 5552 days | 1% |
| EA Anders | 10/10 | 5569 days | 1% |
| Family van Hessem | 8/10 | 5572 days | 1% |
| Anna | 10/10 | 5622 days | 1% |
| Jessica Clarisse | 10/10 | 5626 days | 1% |
| Christine Suess | 10/10 | 5626 days | 1% |
| LindaV | 8/10 | 5892 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
-0.48% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 66 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 28 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 25 | -0.43% |
| 26 | -0.45% |
| 27 | -0.47% |
| 28 | -0.48% |
| 29 | -0.50% |
| 30 | -0.52% |
| 31 | -0.54% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
0.24% 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
97%
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.