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
161 Valid Reviews
The Smiths Farm Holiday Park experience has a total of 163 reviews. There are 161 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 161 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 118 |
|
73% |
| 9/10 | 28 |
|
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% |
96.15% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Smiths Farm Holiday Park valid reviews is 96.15% and is based on 161 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 161 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
97.60%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rudi van Altena | 10/10 | 31 days | 100% |
| Jan | 10/10 | 31 days | 100% |
| james creed | 10/10 | 62 days | 100% |
| Martin | 9/10 | 62 days | 99% |
| Scott Asplin | 10/10 | 307 days | 95% |
| Viktoria | 10/10 | 307 days | 95% |
| Steve | 9/10 | 396 days | 90% |
| EI | 10/10 | 488 days | 86% |
| Andi | 10/10 | 488 days | 86% |
| Hannah | 8/10 | 488 days | 85% |
| Joe | 10/10 | 519 days | 85% |
| Aragorn | 10/10 | 672 days | 74% |
| Thomas | 10/10 | 762 days | 67% |
| Pierre and Martine | 10/10 | 762 days | 67% |
| Mike Howe | 10/10 | 762 days | 67% |
| Sebastian | 10/10 | 793 days | 64% |
| Thomas & Annette | 10/10 | 824 days | 61% |
| Anna | 10/10 | 885 days | 55% |
| Zoe M | 10/10 | 885 days | 55% |
| Thomas Engelhardt | 10/10 | 915 days | 52% |
| RM | 10/10 | 977 days | 46% |
| Corinne | 8/10 | 1038 days | 40% |
| ellie | 10/10 | 1038 days | 40% |
| Brendan | 10/10 | 1068 days | 38% |
| Steve | 10/10 | 1099 days | 35% |
| Milly | 10/10 | 1127 days | 33% |
| Sarah Woolley | 10/10 | 1127 days | 33% |
| Imme | 10/10 | 1158 days | 30% |
| Christian Wood | 10/10 | 1158 days | 30% |
| Kevin McCall | 10/10 | 1189 days | 28% |
| Ralph | 10/10 | 1554 days | 9% |
| Bex & Carl | 10/10 | 1554 days | 9% |
| Gem | 10/10 | 1584 days | 8% |
| Andrew | 10/10 | 1768 days | 5% |
| Kristine V | 10/10 | 1798 days | 5% |
| Barbora | 10/10 | 1857 days | 5% |
| Cloe | 10/10 | 2041 days | 5% |
| Kay | 8/10 | 2102 days | 4% |
| Isabella S | 10/10 | 2133 days | 4% |
| Elin Pranter | 10/10 | 2163 days | 4% |
| Zuzana and family | 10/10 | 2194 days | 4% |
| Just a guy | 10/10 | 2194 days | 4% |
| Liz Wade | 8/10 | 2222 days | 4% |
| Tom S | 10/10 | 2254 days | 4% |
| Erica | 8/10 | 2254 days | 4% |
| Dieter Giesen | 10/10 | 2254 days | 4% |
| Robert | 10/10 | 2285 days | 4% |
| Chris | 10/10 | 2285 days | 4% |
| Callum Mann | 10/10 | 2346 days | 4% |
| Martin Hansen | 10/10 | 2346 days | 4% |
| angelika19 | 10/10 | 2346 days | 4% |
| Anonymous | 10/10 | 2407 days | 4% |
| Anonymous | 10/10 | 2438 days | 4% |
| Nia | 9/10 | 2529 days | 4% |
| Maeike | 9/10 | 2560 days | 4% |
| Maika Laura | 10/10 | 2560 days | 4% |
| Axel & Sabine | 10/10 | 2560 days | 4% |
| Michael | 10/10 | 2588 days | 3% |
| Simone Maccagnan | 10/10 | 2619 days | 3% |
| Beate | 9/10 | 2619 days | 3% |
| Jonas and Lottie | 10/10 | 2650 days | 3% |
| Anita | 9/10 | 2650 days | 3% |
| Lance | 10/10 | 2680 days | 3% |
| Julia Thompson | 10/10 | 2680 days | 3% |
| Brett See | 10/10 | 2711 days | 3% |
| Grizzly Girl | 9/10 | 2711 days | 3% |
| kael Matthews | 9/10 | 2711 days | 3% |
| Kimberly | 10/10 | 2741 days | 3% |
| Jenna webber | 9/10 | 2741 days | 3% |
| Karina | 10/10 | 2925 days | 3% |
| Alde | 10/10 | 2925 days | 3% |
| The Weathersons | 9/10 | 2938 days | 2% |
| Tina Elsdon | 10/10 | 2983 days | 3% |
| Joanna du Toit | 9/10 | 3014 days | 3% |
| Nel Warnaar | 10/10 | 3020 days | 3% |
| Nigel Chapman | 10/10 | 3044 days | 3% |
| Craig Cini | 10/10 | 3109 days | 2% |
| Daniel Unkel | 10/10 | 3158 days | 2% |
| Eric Adelman | 10/10 | 3205 days | 2% |
| Jo Clarke | 8/10 | 3246 days | 2% |
| Jason Morehouse | 10/10 | 3289 days | 2% |
| Alan Brown | 5/10 | 3318 days | 2% |
| Matthias Wohlgemuth | 7/10 | 3332 days | 2% |
| Leilani Lemusu-Read | 10/10 | 3348 days | 2% |
| Kathrin Weigl | 10/10 | 3366 days | 2% |
| Yachar Tajamady | 10/10 | 3407 days | 2% |
| Tina Brill | 10/10 | 3440 days | 2% |
| Robert Ciarrocchi | 10/10 | 3508 days | 2% |
| Courtney | 10/10 | 3533 days | 2% |
| Cullen Wiginton | 10/10 | 3575 days | 2% |
| Alan Honey | 9/10 | 3605 days | 1% |
| Shaun Burns | 10/10 | 3613 days | 1% |
| Etienne Boeziek | 10/10 | 3617 days | 1% |
| Julia Clark | 9/10 | 3641 days | 1% |
| Sandra Kruse | 10/10 | 3643 days | 1% |
| Victoria Lee | 10/10 | 3723 days | 1% |
| Max Brunner | 10/10 | 3738 days | 1% |
| Hanna from Germany | 10/10 | 3750 days | 1% |
| Sarah Gurney | 10/10 | 3775 days | 1% |
| Ron Web | 10/10 | 3775 days | 1% |
| Claudius How | 10/10 | 3776 days | 1% |
| Jayne Lewis | 10/10 | 3776 days | 1% |
| Jade Duncan | 10/10 | 3794 days | 1% |
| Steve Warren | 10/10 | 3805 days | 1% |
| Megan | 10/10 | 3836 days | 1% |
| Nicolas Justin | 10/10 | 4011 days | 0% |
| Julia | 10/10 | 4020 days | 1% |
| John Wray | 10/10 | 4048 days | 1% |
| Constantin D | 10/10 | 4061 days | 1% |
| Jonathan Arndt | 10/10 | 4062 days | 1% |
| Virpi Andersson | 10/10 | 4079 days | 1% |
| Dieter Schmees | 9/10 | 4092 days | 0% |
| Manuela | 10/10 | 4107 days | 0% |
| Dieter & Lydia Schmees | 9/10 | 4110 days | 0% |
| Bert Snel | 10/10 | 4110 days | 0% |
| oren schnabel | 10/10 | 4110 days | 0% |
| SUE COLEMAN | 9/10 | 4110 days | 0% |
| Astrid Egesten | 9/10 | 4118 days | 0% |
| Gianpiero Rodari | 9/10 | 4140 days | 0% |
| sahni | 9/10 | 4325 days | 0% |
| Jan Legein | 10/10 | 4363 days | 0% |
| Josefin Lind | 9/10 | 4365 days | 0% |
| Herman Holmgist | 9/10 | 4365 days | 0% |
| Leeann Newton | 9/10 | 4412 days | 1% |
| Andrew Young | 10/10 | 4414 days | 1% |
| GN100 | 9/10 | 4414 days | 1% |
| Michael Turek | 10/10 | 4445 days | 1% |
| Linda Morey | 10/10 | 4445 days | 1% |
| Eric and Nienke | 8/10 | 4476 days | 1% |
| Julian Kemp | 10/10 | 4506 days | 1% |
| Steve Warren | 10/10 | 4537 days | 1% |
| PaulMacca | 10/10 | 4629 days | 1% |
| AoP | 10/10 | 4751 days | 1% |
| Penny Compton | 10/10 | 4751 days | 1% |
| Julian Roots | 8/10 | 4751 days | 1% |
| Helen and Ogi | 10/10 | 4764 days | 1% |
| Lis Bon | 10/10 | 4779 days | 1% |
| Pahlfamily | 10/10 | 4810 days | 1% |
| Joroen Borkert | 9/10 | 4828 days | 1% |
| Johannes OBerlin | 10/10 | 5113 days | 1% |
| Shavill | 10/10 | 5116 days | 1% |
| Michael Stoll | 10/10 | 5126 days | 1% |
| E Smudde | 8/10 | 5129 days | 1% |
| RhysWendy | 10/10 | 5176 days | 1% |
| Ken Jones | 9/10 | 5457 days | 1% |
| Steve Waterhouse | 8/10 | 5467 days | 1% |
| Jan Visser | 8/10 | 5482 days | 1% |
| Victoria Purver | 10/10 | 5485 days | 1% |
| Andrew Koster | 9/10 | 5495 days | 1% |
| Emma Edis-Bates | 9/10 | 5498 days | 1% |
| rhubarbsky | 10/10 | 5572 days | 1% |
| krisevelyn | 9/10 | 5786 days | 1% |
| Caitriona Doyle | 10/10 | 5869 days | 1% |
| Hanz | 10/10 | 5871 days | 1% |
| Linley Faulkner | 10/10 | 5875 days | 1% |
| EA Anders | 10/10 | 5892 days | 1% |
| Family van Hessem | 8/10 | 5895 days | 1% |
| Anna | 10/10 | 5945 days | 1% |
| Jessica Clarisse | 10/10 | 5949 days | 1% |
| Christine Suess | 10/10 | 5949 days | 1% |
| LindaV | 8/10 | 6215 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
-0.08% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 55 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 4 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 1 | -0.02% |
| 2 | -0.04% |
| 3 | -0.06% |
| 4 | -0.08% |
| 5 | -0.10% |
| 6 | -0.12% |
| 7 | -0.14% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
0.21% 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.