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 Riverside 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.
Riverside Holiday Park
Valid Reviews
126 Valid Reviews
The Riverside Holiday Park experience has a total of 131 reviews. There are 126 valid reviews that are included when calculating the ranking score and 5 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 126 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 59 |
|
47% |
| 9/10 | 27 |
|
21% |
| 8/10 | 17 |
|
13% |
| 7/10 | 8 |
|
6% |
| 6/10 | 4 |
|
3% |
| 5/10 | 6 |
|
5% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 4 |
|
3% |
86.19% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Riverside Holiday Park valid reviews is 86.19% and is based on 126 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
20 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 126 valid reviews, the experience has 20 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 20 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 2 |
|
10% |
| 9/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 8/10 | 6 |
|
30% |
| 7/10 | 3 |
|
15% |
| 6/10 | 3 |
|
15% |
| 5/10 | 3 |
|
15% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 1 |
|
5% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 2 |
|
10% |
63.50% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Riverside Holiday Park face-to-face reviews is 63.50% and is based on 20 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
94.40%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ellie | 9/10 | 32 days | 100% |
| Kay | 9/10 | 215 days | 97% |
| Georgie | 10/10 | 246 days | 98% |
| Doreen Kirk | 8/10 | 246 days | 96% |
| Emma B | 10/10 | 275 days | 97% |
| Dylan | 10/10 | 459 days | 89% |
| Tzan from CA | 10/10 | 490 days | 87% |
| Julie | 10/10 | 551 days | 84% |
| Tom | 10/10 | 640 days | 77% |
| Amy Shoemake | 10/10 | 702 days | 73% |
| Evan | 10/10 | 732 days | 70% |
| Roxanne | 10/10 | 1097 days | 36% |
| Cera | 10/10 | 1250 days | 24% |
| Wayne Ravelich | 8/10 | 1342 days | 18% |
| Clive | 10/10 | 1401 days | 15% |
| Tourist in my own country | 1/10 | 1401 days | 6% |
| Jade Bray | 9/10 | 1401 days | 15% |
| Harry | 10/10 | 1401 days | 15% |
| Dan | 9/10 | 1462 days | 12% |
| Teesh K | 9/10 | 1462 days | 12% |
| Daretobe | 9/10 | 1462 days | 12% |
| Manuela | 10/10 | 1523 days | 10% |
| Shar-ron & Jim | 9/10 | 1523 days | 10% |
| Holly J | 8/10 | 1585 days | 8% |
| Anneke | 10/10 | 1707 days | 6% |
| Red G. | 10/10 | 1736 days | 5% |
| Thpes | 8/10 | 1767 days | 5% |
| Brad | 10/10 | 1767 days | 5% |
| Josh & Eleanor | 9/10 | 1859 days | 5% |
| Phil Bennett | 9/10 | 1889 days | 5% |
| Phil | 9/10 | 1889 days | 5% |
| Shelbi Kelly | 10/10 | 1889 days | 5% |
| Gaudenz Schnell | 10/10 | 2073 days | 5% |
| Marie van Tol | 9/10 | 2101 days | 4% |
| Beth | 10/10 | 2101 days | 4% |
| Jeremy | 9/10 | 2132 days | 4% |
| Jacqui | 10/10 | 2163 days | 4% |
| Marco | 9/10 | 2193 days | 4% |
| Ryan | 10/10 | 2224 days | 4% |
| Grizzly Girl | 10/10 | 2224 days | 4% |
| Lance | 10/10 | 2224 days | 4% |
| Daphne H | 9/10 | 2254 days | 4% |
| Cassie | 9/10 | 2254 days | 4% |
| Esther | 8/10 | 2346 days | 4% |
| Clovis C. | 10/10 | 2407 days | 4% |
| Tom J. | 9/10 | 2438 days | 4% |
| Anke | 9/10 | 2438 days | 4% |
| S Weslake | 9/10 | 2438 days | 4% |
| Tom Meulders | 5/10 | 2510 days | 3% |
| Joe Trigg | 5/10 | 2560 days | 3% |
| Gary Prescot | 8/10 | 2591 days | 3% |
| Peter Suan | 10/10 | 2704 days | 3% |
| Lotta Vuorjoki | 10/10 | 2735 days | 3% |
| Janet Pentelow | 7/10 | 2764 days | 3% |
| Julia Kurtz | 8/10 | 2773 days | 3% |
| Tracey Leyston | 10/10 | 2813 days | 3% |
| Kati Behrendt | 9/10 | 2821 days | 3% |
| Tombeadle | 10/10 | 2831 days | 3% |
| Peter Armstrong | 6/10 | 2831 days | 3% |
| Erich Brueggermann | 7/10 | 2860 days | 3% |
| Rebecca Lindsey | 7/10 | 2862 days | 3% |
| Robert Hunt | 8/10 | 2903 days | 3% |
| Sheryl Hicks | 8/10 | 2925 days | 3% |
| Ivan Wee | 10/10 | 2929 days | 3% |
| Daphne H | 9/10 | 2977 days | 3% |
| Daniel Gold | 10/10 | 3076 days | 3% |
| william Sinclair | 10/10 | 3076 days | 3% |
| samuele cason | 10/10 | 3107 days | 2% |
| Wayne Jeskie | 9/10 | 3117 days | 2% |
| Ray Tombs | 10/10 | 3127 days | 2% |
| Julian Minnis | 10/10 | 3128 days | 2% |
| Jean Evans | 10/10 | 3168 days | 2% |
| Richard Thorpe | 7/10 | 3172 days | 2% |
| Philippa and Adam | 9/10 | 3183 days | 2% |
| Mike Awater | 10/10 | 3185 days | 2% |
| Julia Rey | 10/10 | 3193 days | 2% |
| Henry Gann | 10/10 | 3195 days | 2% |
| Jenn | 10/10 | 3225 days | 2% |
| Brian Gray | 10/10 | 3228 days | 2% |
| Meta bobnar | 9/10 | 3318 days | 2% |
| Kirsty Longland | 10/10 | 3351 days | 2% |
| Wolfgang Rank | 10/10 | 3502 days | 2% |
| Stephanie Poppe | 7/10 | 3508 days | 2% |
| Esther Itier | 8/10 | 3528 days | 1% |
| Thomas Neron | 8/10 | 3528 days | 1% |
| Jaron Frost | 10/10 | 3534 days | 2% |
| Pete Arney | 9/10 | 3534 days | 2% |
| Averil Brown | 9/10 | 3559 days | 2% |
| Janie James | 10/10 | 3593 days | 2% |
| Enrico Anna | 10/10 | 3593 days | 2% |
| mark radford | 10/10 | 3593 days | 2% |
| Bjorn Privat | 10/10 | 3601 days | 2% |
| Ingrid Harder | 10/10 | 3624 days | 1% |
| Joanne Robertson | 8/10 | 3631 days | 1% |
| johno Tunnell | 9/10 | 3654 days | 1% |
| Karen Boot | 8/10 | 3654 days | 1% |
| Emma Barr | 10/10 | 3654 days | 1% |
| Nicola Whelan Henderson | 10/10 | 3654 days | 1% |
| Ellen McKee | 10/10 | 3654 days | 1% |
| Scott kearney | 10/10 | 3654 days | 1% |
| Lucas MacDonald | 10/10 | 3654 days | 1% |
| Hartwig Crailsheim | 10/10 | 3654 days | 1% |
| kim haward | 10/10 | 3746 days | 1% |
| Alan Williams | 10/10 | 3868 days | 1% |
| Thomas Hölscher | 10/10 | 3868 days | 1% |
| Thomas Walsh | 9/10 | 3899 days | 1% |
| Steve Fraser | 5/10 | 3927 days | 1% |
| Lee D | 1/10 | 4142 days | 0% |
| Alex Laidlaw | 5/10 | 4361 days | 0% |
| Sander Heike | 8/10 | 4601 days | 1% |
| Monika Kneidl | 7/10 | 4604 days | 1% |
| Lorna Williams | 7/10 | 4624 days | 1% |
| Hilbert vanEssen | 3/10 | 4626 days | 0% |
| Ed & Katie Riches | 6/10 | 4641 days | 1% |
| Preben vil Helmsen | 6/10 | 4641 days | 1% |
| Thomas & Ruth Hardmeier | 1/10 | 4646 days | 0% |
| Kurt & Noemi Buhler | 1/10 | 4653 days | 0% |
| Des & Ann Bidwell | 6/10 | 4653 days | 1% |
| Dugald McCallum | 5/10 | 4657 days | 0% |
| James McColl | 10/10 | 4750 days | 1% |
| Powerfamily | 8/10 | 4873 days | 1% |
| Jaime Ress | 8/10 | 4975 days | 1% |
| Cory Wornell | 10/10 | 4984 days | 1% |
| Thelia Beament | 8/10 | 4998 days | 1% |
| Tim Wright | 7/10 | 5021 days | 1% |
| SonjaG | 5/10 | 5711 days | 0% |
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 Riverside Holiday Park experience has plenty of reviews and does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
Recent Reviews Adjustment
-0.54% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 49 days. However the Riverside 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 Riverside Holiday Park experience has been adjusted for 28 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 25 | -0.49% |
| 26 | -0.50% |
| 27 | -0.52% |
| 28 | -0.54% |
| 29 | -0.56% |
| 30 | -0.58% |
| 31 | -0.60% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
0.54% 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
94%
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.