Kia ora, 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 Cable Bay 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>)
Cable Bay Holiday Park
Valid Reviews
78 Valid Reviews
The Cable Bay Holiday Park experience has a total of 80 reviews. There are 78 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 78 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 43 |
|
55% |
| 9/10 | 24 |
|
31% |
| 8/10 | 8 |
|
10% |
| 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 | 1 |
|
1% |
92.69% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Cable Bay Holiday Park valid reviews is 92.69% and is based on 78 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
22 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 78 valid reviews, the experience has 22 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 22 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 8 |
|
36% |
| 9/10 | 9 |
|
41% |
| 8/10 | 4 |
|
18% |
| 7/10 | 1 |
|
5% |
| 6/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 5/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
90.91% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Cable Bay Holiday Park face-to-face reviews is 90.91% and is based on 22 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
95.00%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Emily | 10/10 | 24 days | 100% |
| Duncan | 10/10 | 55 days | 100% |
| Pensioners on tour | 10/10 | 83 days | 100% |
| Silvia | 10/10 | 83 days | 100% |
| C H | 9/10 | 175 days | 97% |
| Pauline | 1/10 | 420 days | 36% |
| Sue | 10/10 | 480 days | 87% |
| Ernest | 10/10 | 572 days | 81% |
| Kelsie | 10/10 | 633 days | 77% |
| Carolin | 10/10 | 664 days | 75% |
| Steffen | 10/10 | 1881 days | 5% |
| Lauren | 10/10 | 1910 days | 5% |
| Ju | 9/10 | 1910 days | 5% |
| Michael | 10/10 | 1910 days | 5% |
| Tanja & Sven | 10/10 | 1941 days | 5% |
| Erica | 9/10 | 1941 days | 4% |
| Lukas | 10/10 | 1972 days | 4% |
| Henry Waters | 10/10 | 1972 days | 4% |
| Kiwiman | 10/10 | 2002 days | 4% |
| Eugene Tan | 9/10 | 2186 days | 4% |
| Paul Smith | 9/10 | 2275 days | 4% |
| Malcolm Garth | 9/10 | 2306 days | 4% |
| Rod Diehl | 9/10 | 2306 days | 4% |
| Roland Hänni | 10/10 | 2306 days | 4% |
| Ray | 10/10 | 2367 days | 4% |
| CJC | 10/10 | 2367 days | 4% |
| Andre de Jong | 10/10 | 2621 days | 3% |
| Robin Heels | 10/10 | 2633 days | 3% |
| Joe Trigg | 10/10 | 2734 days | 3% |
| Gary Prescot | 10/10 | 2765 days | 3% |
| Anja Röhrich | 10/10 | 2935 days | 3% |
| Janet Pentelow | 9/10 | 2938 days | 3% |
| Ebba Lindqvist | 8/10 | 2985 days | 2% |
| Dale Mutu | 9/10 | 3035 days | 2% |
| Ursula Schoenenberger | 10/10 | 3054 days | 2% |
| Robert Hunt | 8/10 | 3077 days | 2% |
| Guenter | 9/10 | 3096 days | 2% |
| Greg Thompson | 10/10 | 3097 days | 2% |
| Will McConnell | 10/10 | 3124 days | 2% |
| Gavin Cameron | 10/10 | 3315 days | 2% |
| Jan Becker | 10/10 | 3317 days | 2% |
| Sven Hasselberger | 10/10 | 3383 days | 2% |
| Jean marc Daubenfeld | 10/10 | 3396 days | 2% |
| Henrike | 5/10 | 3431 days | 1% |
| Hya@nztrip | 9/10 | 3462 days | 2% |
| Nell Hearle | 10/10 | 3719 days | 1% |
| Melvin Spear | 8/10 | 3727 days | 1% |
| Robert Warner | 10/10 | 3766 days | 1% |
| Jan-Peter Stripp | 7/10 | 4041 days | 0% |
| Brita Topp | 8/10 | 4042 days | 0% |
| Romina De Hill | 8/10 | 4071 days | 0% |
| GN100 | 9/10 | 4101 days | 0% |
| Sanne Sprogoe Borgaa | 9/10 | 4113 days | 0% |
| Lars Borgaa | 8/10 | 4113 days | 0% |
| Brian | 10/10 | 4193 days | 0% |
| Nicholas Ng | 9/10 | 4193 days | 0% |
| Helen King | 9/10 | 4254 days | 0% |
| Jay Sorrell | 10/10 | 4254 days | 0% |
| Jayne UK | 10/10 | 4466 days | 1% |
| Nadine | 10/10 | 4510 days | 1% |
| Martyn Kool | 9/10 | 4514 days | 1% |
| Marieke | 9/10 | 4514 days | 1% |
| Stephanie Levepue | 9/10 | 4532 days | 1% |
| Behrens | 10/10 | 4537 days | 1% |
| Roger ter Horst | 8/10 | 4827 days | 1% |
| HamishK | 9/10 | 4832 days | 1% |
| Daniel Kriecht | 9/10 | 5152 days | 1% |
| chrissie2011 | 10/10 | 5228 days | 1% |
| Jesper Sch | 9/10 | 5516 days | 1% |
| Michael | 8/10 | 5544 days | 1% |
| Monica and Danie. | 9/10 | 5556 days | 1% |
| Charlie Jewell | 9/10 | 5558 days | 1% |
| Mary Selfa | 10/10 | 5558 days | 1% |
| Martin | 9/10 | 5560 days | 1% |
| weidep | 10/10 | 5608 days | 1% |
| ilkal | 10/10 | 5610 days | 1% |
| Marianne Klotterich | 10/10 | 5886 days | 1% |
| Edcan | 10/10 | 5886 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 Cable Bay Holiday Park experience has plenty of reviews and does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
Recent Reviews Adjustment
-0.16% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 73 days. However the Cable Bay 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 Cable Bay Holiday Park experience has been adjusted for 10 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 7 | -0.11% |
| 8 | -0.13% |
| 9 | -0.15% |
| 10 | -0.16% |
| 11 | -0.18% |
| 12 | -0.19% |
| 13 | -0.21% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
0.45% 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
95%
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.