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.
Smiths Farm Holiday Park
Valid Reviews
152 Valid Reviews
The Smiths Farm Holiday Park experience has a total of 153 reviews. There are 152 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 152 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 112 |
|
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% |
96.18% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Smiths Farm Holiday Park valid reviews is 96.18% and is based on 152 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 152 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
98.76%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| EI | 10/10 | 17 days | 100% |
| Joe | 10/10 | 48 days | 100% |
| Aragorn | 10/10 | 201 days | 98% |
| Thomas | 10/10 | 291 days | 95% |
| Pierre and Martine | 10/10 | 291 days | 95% |
| Mike Howe | 10/10 | 291 days | 95% |
| Sebastian | 10/10 | 322 days | 94% |
| Thomas & Annette | 10/10 | 353 days | 93% |
| Anna | 10/10 | 414 days | 90% |
| Zoe M | 10/10 | 414 days | 90% |
| Thomas Engelhardt | 10/10 | 444 days | 89% |
| RM | 10/10 | 506 days | 85% |
| Corinne | 8/10 | 567 days | 80% |
| ellie | 10/10 | 567 days | 82% |
| Brendan | 10/10 | 597 days | 80% |
| Steve | 10/10 | 628 days | 78% |
| Milly | 10/10 | 656 days | 75% |
| Sarah Woolley | 10/10 | 656 days | 75% |
| Imme | 10/10 | 687 days | 73% |
| Christian Wood | 10/10 | 687 days | 73% |
| Kevin McCall | 10/10 | 718 days | 71% |
| Ralph | 10/10 | 1083 days | 36% |
| Bex & Carl | 10/10 | 1083 days | 36% |
| Gem | 10/10 | 1113 days | 34% |
| Andrew | 10/10 | 1297 days | 21% |
| Kristine V | 10/10 | 1327 days | 19% |
| Barbora | 10/10 | 1386 days | 16% |
| Cloe | 10/10 | 1570 days | 9% |
| Kay | 8/10 | 1631 days | 7% |
| Isabella S | 10/10 | 1662 days | 6% |
| Elin Pranter | 10/10 | 1692 days | 6% |
| Zuzana and family | 10/10 | 1723 days | 6% |
| Just a guy | 10/10 | 1723 days | 6% |
| Liz Wade | 8/10 | 1752 days | 5% |
| Tom S | 10/10 | 1783 days | 5% |
| Erica | 8/10 | 1783 days | 5% |
| Dieter Giesen | 10/10 | 1783 days | 5% |
| Robert | 10/10 | 1814 days | 5% |
| Chris | 10/10 | 1814 days | 5% |
| Callum Mann | 10/10 | 1875 days | 5% |
| Martin Hansen | 10/10 | 1875 days | 5% |
| angelika19 | 10/10 | 1875 days | 5% |
| Anonymous | 10/10 | 1936 days | 5% |
| Anonymous | 10/10 | 1967 days | 5% |
| Nia | 9/10 | 2058 days | 4% |
| Maeike | 9/10 | 2089 days | 4% |
| Maika Laura | 10/10 | 2089 days | 4% |
| Axel & Sabine | 10/10 | 2089 days | 4% |
| Michael | 10/10 | 2117 days | 4% |
| Simone Maccagnan | 10/10 | 2148 days | 4% |
| Beate | 9/10 | 2148 days | 4% |
| Jonas and Lottie | 10/10 | 2179 days | 4% |
| Anita | 9/10 | 2179 days | 4% |
| Lance | 10/10 | 2209 days | 4% |
| Julia Thompson | 10/10 | 2209 days | 4% |
| Brett See | 10/10 | 2240 days | 4% |
| Grizzly Girl | 9/10 | 2240 days | 4% |
| kael Matthews | 9/10 | 2240 days | 4% |
| Kimberly | 10/10 | 2270 days | 4% |
| Jenna webber | 9/10 | 2270 days | 4% |
| Karina | 10/10 | 2454 days | 4% |
| Alde | 10/10 | 2454 days | 4% |
| The Weathersons | 9/10 | 2467 days | 3% |
| Tina Elsdon | 10/10 | 2513 days | 4% |
| Joanna du Toit | 9/10 | 2544 days | 4% |
| Nel Warnaar | 10/10 | 2549 days | 4% |
| Nigel Chapman | 10/10 | 2573 days | 3% |
| Craig Cini | 10/10 | 2638 days | 3% |
| Daniel Unkel | 10/10 | 2687 days | 3% |
| Eric Adelman | 10/10 | 2734 days | 3% |
| Jo Clarke | 8/10 | 2775 days | 3% |
| Jason Morehouse | 10/10 | 2819 days | 3% |
| Alan Brown | 5/10 | 2847 days | 2% |
| Matthias Wohlgemuth | 7/10 | 2861 days | 3% |
| Leilani Lemusu-Read | 10/10 | 2878 days | 3% |
| Kathrin Weigl | 10/10 | 2895 days | 3% |
| Yachar Tajamady | 10/10 | 2936 days | 3% |
| Tina Brill | 10/10 | 2970 days | 3% |
| Robert Ciarrocchi | 10/10 | 3037 days | 3% |
| Courtney | 10/10 | 3062 days | 3% |
| Cullen Wiginton | 10/10 | 3104 days | 2% |
| Alan Honey | 9/10 | 3134 days | 2% |
| Shaun Burns | 10/10 | 3142 days | 2% |
| Etienne Boeziek | 10/10 | 3146 days | 2% |
| Julia Clark | 9/10 | 3170 days | 2% |
| Sandra Kruse | 10/10 | 3172 days | 2% |
| Victoria Lee | 10/10 | 3252 days | 2% |
| Max Brunner | 10/10 | 3267 days | 2% |
| Hanna from Germany | 10/10 | 3279 days | 2% |
| Sarah Gurney | 10/10 | 3304 days | 2% |
| Ron Web | 10/10 | 3305 days | 2% |
| Claudius How | 10/10 | 3305 days | 2% |
| Jayne Lewis | 10/10 | 3305 days | 2% |
| Jade Duncan | 10/10 | 3323 days | 2% |
| Steve Warren | 10/10 | 3334 days | 2% |
| Megan | 10/10 | 3366 days | 2% |
| Nicolas Justin | 10/10 | 3540 days | 1% |
| Julia | 10/10 | 3550 days | 2% |
| John Wray | 10/10 | 3578 days | 2% |
| Constantin D | 10/10 | 3590 days | 2% |
| Jonathan Arndt | 10/10 | 3591 days | 2% |
| Virpi Andersson | 10/10 | 3609 days | 1% |
| Dieter Schmees | 9/10 | 3621 days | 1% |
| Manuela | 10/10 | 3636 days | 1% |
| Dieter & Lydia Schmees | 9/10 | 3640 days | 1% |
| Bert Snel | 10/10 | 3640 days | 1% |
| oren schnabel | 10/10 | 3640 days | 1% |
| SUE COLEMAN | 9/10 | 3640 days | 1% |
| Astrid Egesten | 9/10 | 3647 days | 1% |
| Gianpiero Rodari | 9/10 | 3670 days | 1% |
| sahni | 9/10 | 3854 days | 1% |
| Jan Legein | 10/10 | 3892 days | 1% |
| Josefin Lind | 9/10 | 3894 days | 1% |
| Herman Holmgist | 9/10 | 3894 days | 1% |
| Leeann Newton | 9/10 | 3941 days | 1% |
| Andrew Young | 10/10 | 3943 days | 1% |
| GN100 | 9/10 | 3943 days | 1% |
| Michael Turek | 10/10 | 3974 days | 1% |
| Linda Morey | 10/10 | 3974 days | 1% |
| Eric and Nienke | 8/10 | 4005 days | 1% |
| Julian Kemp | 10/10 | 4035 days | 1% |
| Steve Warren | 10/10 | 4066 days | 1% |
| PaulMacca | 10/10 | 4158 days | 0% |
| AoP | 10/10 | 4280 days | 0% |
| Penny Compton | 10/10 | 4280 days | 0% |
| Julian Roots | 8/10 | 4280 days | 0% |
| Helen and Ogi | 10/10 | 4293 days | 0% |
| Lis Bon | 10/10 | 4308 days | 0% |
| Pahlfamily | 10/10 | 4339 days | 0% |
| Joroen Borkert | 9/10 | 4357 days | 0% |
| Johannes OBerlin | 10/10 | 4642 days | 1% |
| Shavill | 10/10 | 4645 days | 1% |
| Michael Stoll | 10/10 | 4655 days | 1% |
| E Smudde | 8/10 | 4658 days | 1% |
| RhysWendy | 10/10 | 4705 days | 1% |
| Ken Jones | 9/10 | 4986 days | 1% |
| Steve Waterhouse | 8/10 | 4996 days | 1% |
| Jan Visser | 8/10 | 5011 days | 1% |
| Victoria Purver | 10/10 | 5014 days | 1% |
| Andrew Koster | 9/10 | 5024 days | 1% |
| Emma Edis-Bates | 9/10 | 5027 days | 1% |
| rhubarbsky | 10/10 | 5101 days | 1% |
| krisevelyn | 9/10 | 5315 days | 1% |
| Caitriona Doyle | 10/10 | 5398 days | 1% |
| Hanz | 10/10 | 5400 days | 1% |
| Linley Faulkner | 10/10 | 5404 days | 1% |
| EA Anders | 10/10 | 5421 days | 1% |
| Family van Hessem | 8/10 | 5424 days | 1% |
| Anna | 10/10 | 5474 days | 1% |
| Jessica Clarisse | 10/10 | 5478 days | 1% |
| Christine Suess | 10/10 | 5478 days | 1% |
| LindaV | 8/10 | 5744 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
-0.14% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 44 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 7 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 4 | -0.08% |
| 5 | -0.10% |
| 6 | -0.12% |
| 7 | -0.14% |
| 8 | -0.16% |
| 9 | -0.18% |
| 10 | -0.20% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
0.11% 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.