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
97.80%
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 | 52 days | 100% |
| Viktoria | 10/10 | 52 days | 100% |
| Steve | 9/10 | 141 days | 98% |
| EI | 10/10 | 233 days | 97% |
| Andi | 10/10 | 233 days | 97% |
| Hannah | 8/10 | 233 days | 95% |
| Joe | 10/10 | 264 days | 96% |
| Aragorn | 10/10 | 417 days | 90% |
| Thomas | 10/10 | 507 days | 85% |
| Pierre and Martine | 10/10 | 507 days | 85% |
| Mike Howe | 10/10 | 507 days | 85% |
| Sebastian | 10/10 | 538 days | 84% |
| Thomas & Annette | 10/10 | 569 days | 82% |
| Anna | 10/10 | 630 days | 77% |
| Zoe M | 10/10 | 630 days | 77% |
| Thomas Engelhardt | 10/10 | 660 days | 75% |
| RM | 10/10 | 722 days | 70% |
| Corinne | 8/10 | 783 days | 64% |
| ellie | 10/10 | 783 days | 65% |
| Brendan | 10/10 | 813 days | 62% |
| Steve | 10/10 | 844 days | 59% |
| Milly | 10/10 | 872 days | 57% |
| Sarah Woolley | 10/10 | 872 days | 57% |
| Imme | 10/10 | 903 days | 54% |
| Christian Wood | 10/10 | 903 days | 54% |
| Kevin McCall | 10/10 | 934 days | 50% |
| Ralph | 10/10 | 1299 days | 21% |
| Bex & Carl | 10/10 | 1299 days | 21% |
| Gem | 10/10 | 1329 days | 19% |
| Andrew | 10/10 | 1513 days | 11% |
| Kristine V | 10/10 | 1543 days | 10% |
| Barbora | 10/10 | 1602 days | 8% |
| Cloe | 10/10 | 1786 days | 5% |
| Kay | 8/10 | 1847 days | 5% |
| Isabella S | 10/10 | 1878 days | 5% |
| Elin Pranter | 10/10 | 1908 days | 5% |
| Zuzana and family | 10/10 | 1939 days | 5% |
| Just a guy | 10/10 | 1939 days | 5% |
| Liz Wade | 8/10 | 1967 days | 5% |
| Tom S | 10/10 | 1999 days | 5% |
| Erica | 8/10 | 1999 days | 5% |
| Dieter Giesen | 10/10 | 1999 days | 5% |
| Robert | 10/10 | 2030 days | 5% |
| Chris | 10/10 | 2030 days | 5% |
| Callum Mann | 10/10 | 2091 days | 4% |
| Martin Hansen | 10/10 | 2091 days | 4% |
| angelika19 | 10/10 | 2091 days | 4% |
| Anonymous | 10/10 | 2152 days | 4% |
| Anonymous | 10/10 | 2183 days | 4% |
| Nia | 9/10 | 2274 days | 4% |
| Maeike | 9/10 | 2305 days | 4% |
| Maika Laura | 10/10 | 2305 days | 4% |
| Axel & Sabine | 10/10 | 2305 days | 4% |
| Michael | 10/10 | 2333 days | 4% |
| Simone Maccagnan | 10/10 | 2364 days | 4% |
| Beate | 9/10 | 2364 days | 4% |
| Jonas and Lottie | 10/10 | 2395 days | 4% |
| Anita | 9/10 | 2395 days | 4% |
| Lance | 10/10 | 2425 days | 4% |
| Julia Thompson | 10/10 | 2425 days | 4% |
| Brett See | 10/10 | 2456 days | 4% |
| Grizzly Girl | 9/10 | 2456 days | 4% |
| kael Matthews | 9/10 | 2456 days | 4% |
| Kimberly | 10/10 | 2486 days | 4% |
| Jenna webber | 9/10 | 2486 days | 4% |
| Karina | 10/10 | 2670 days | 3% |
| Alde | 10/10 | 2670 days | 3% |
| The Weathersons | 9/10 | 2683 days | 2% |
| Tina Elsdon | 10/10 | 2728 days | 3% |
| Joanna du Toit | 9/10 | 2759 days | 3% |
| Nel Warnaar | 10/10 | 2765 days | 3% |
| Nigel Chapman | 10/10 | 2789 days | 3% |
| Craig Cini | 10/10 | 2854 days | 3% |
| Daniel Unkel | 10/10 | 2903 days | 3% |
| Eric Adelman | 10/10 | 2950 days | 3% |
| Jo Clarke | 8/10 | 2991 days | 3% |
| Jason Morehouse | 10/10 | 3034 days | 3% |
| Alan Brown | 5/10 | 3063 days | 2% |
| Matthias Wohlgemuth | 7/10 | 3077 days | 2% |
| Leilani Lemusu-Read | 10/10 | 3093 days | 3% |
| Kathrin Weigl | 10/10 | 3111 days | 2% |
| Yachar Tajamady | 10/10 | 3152 days | 2% |
| Tina Brill | 10/10 | 3185 days | 2% |
| Robert Ciarrocchi | 10/10 | 3253 days | 2% |
| Courtney | 10/10 | 3278 days | 2% |
| Cullen Wiginton | 10/10 | 3320 days | 2% |
| Alan Honey | 9/10 | 3350 days | 2% |
| Shaun Burns | 10/10 | 3358 days | 2% |
| Etienne Boeziek | 10/10 | 3362 days | 2% |
| Julia Clark | 9/10 | 3386 days | 2% |
| Sandra Kruse | 10/10 | 3388 days | 2% |
| Victoria Lee | 10/10 | 3468 days | 2% |
| Max Brunner | 10/10 | 3483 days | 2% |
| Hanna from Germany | 10/10 | 3495 days | 2% |
| Sarah Gurney | 10/10 | 3520 days | 2% |
| Ron Web | 10/10 | 3520 days | 2% |
| Claudius How | 10/10 | 3521 days | 2% |
| Jayne Lewis | 10/10 | 3521 days | 2% |
| Jade Duncan | 10/10 | 3539 days | 2% |
| Steve Warren | 10/10 | 3550 days | 2% |
| Megan | 10/10 | 3581 days | 2% |
| Nicolas Justin | 10/10 | 3756 days | 1% |
| Julia | 10/10 | 3765 days | 1% |
| John Wray | 10/10 | 3793 days | 1% |
| Constantin D | 10/10 | 3806 days | 1% |
| Jonathan Arndt | 10/10 | 3807 days | 1% |
| Virpi Andersson | 10/10 | 3824 days | 1% |
| Dieter Schmees | 9/10 | 3837 days | 1% |
| Manuela | 10/10 | 3852 days | 1% |
| Dieter & Lydia Schmees | 9/10 | 3855 days | 1% |
| Bert Snel | 10/10 | 3855 days | 1% |
| oren schnabel | 10/10 | 3855 days | 1% |
| SUE COLEMAN | 9/10 | 3855 days | 1% |
| Astrid Egesten | 9/10 | 3863 days | 1% |
| Gianpiero Rodari | 9/10 | 3885 days | 1% |
| sahni | 9/10 | 4070 days | 1% |
| Jan Legein | 10/10 | 4108 days | 0% |
| Josefin Lind | 9/10 | 4110 days | 0% |
| Herman Holmgist | 9/10 | 4110 days | 0% |
| Leeann Newton | 9/10 | 4157 days | 0% |
| Andrew Young | 10/10 | 4159 days | 0% |
| GN100 | 9/10 | 4159 days | 0% |
| Michael Turek | 10/10 | 4190 days | 0% |
| Linda Morey | 10/10 | 4190 days | 0% |
| Eric and Nienke | 8/10 | 4221 days | 0% |
| Julian Kemp | 10/10 | 4251 days | 0% |
| Steve Warren | 10/10 | 4282 days | 0% |
| PaulMacca | 10/10 | 4374 days | 0% |
| AoP | 10/10 | 4496 days | 1% |
| Penny Compton | 10/10 | 4496 days | 1% |
| Julian Roots | 8/10 | 4496 days | 1% |
| Helen and Ogi | 10/10 | 4509 days | 1% |
| Lis Bon | 10/10 | 4524 days | 1% |
| Pahlfamily | 10/10 | 4555 days | 1% |
| Joroen Borkert | 9/10 | 4573 days | 1% |
| Johannes OBerlin | 10/10 | 4858 days | 1% |
| Shavill | 10/10 | 4861 days | 1% |
| Michael Stoll | 10/10 | 4871 days | 1% |
| E Smudde | 8/10 | 4874 days | 1% |
| RhysWendy | 10/10 | 4921 days | 1% |
| Ken Jones | 9/10 | 5202 days | 1% |
| Steve Waterhouse | 8/10 | 5212 days | 1% |
| Jan Visser | 8/10 | 5227 days | 1% |
| Victoria Purver | 10/10 | 5230 days | 1% |
| Andrew Koster | 9/10 | 5240 days | 1% |
| Emma Edis-Bates | 9/10 | 5243 days | 1% |
| rhubarbsky | 10/10 | 5317 days | 1% |
| krisevelyn | 9/10 | 5531 days | 1% |
| Caitriona Doyle | 10/10 | 5614 days | 1% |
| Hanz | 10/10 | 5616 days | 1% |
| Linley Faulkner | 10/10 | 5620 days | 1% |
| EA Anders | 10/10 | 5637 days | 1% |
| Family van Hessem | 8/10 | 5640 days | 1% |
| Anna | 10/10 | 5690 days | 1% |
| Jessica Clarisse | 10/10 | 5694 days | 1% |
| Christine Suess | 10/10 | 5694 days | 1% |
| LindaV | 8/10 | 5960 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
-0.41% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 119 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 39 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 36 | -0.38% |
| 37 | -0.39% |
| 38 | -0.40% |
| 39 | -0.41% |
| 40 | -0.43% |
| 41 | -0.44% |
| 42 | -0.45% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
0.22% 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
98%
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.