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 Carters Beach TOP 10 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>)
Carters Beach TOP 10 Holiday Park
Valid Reviews
123 Valid Reviews
The Carters Beach TOP 10 Holiday Park experience has a total of 128 reviews. There are 123 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 123 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 34 |
|
28% |
| 9/10 | 19 |
|
15% |
| 8/10 | 35 |
|
28% |
| 7/10 | 15 |
|
12% |
| 6/10 | 4 |
|
3% |
| 5/10 | 6 |
|
5% |
| 4/10 | 4 |
|
3% |
| 3/10 | 2 |
|
2% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 4 |
|
3% |
79.35% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Carters Beach TOP 10 Holiday Park valid reviews is 79.35% and is based on 123 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
72 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 123 valid reviews, the experience has 72 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 72 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 17 |
|
24% |
| 9/10 | 11 |
|
15% |
| 8/10 | 22 |
|
31% |
| 7/10 | 12 |
|
17% |
| 6/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 5/10 | 4 |
|
6% |
| 4/10 | 2 |
|
3% |
| 3/10 | 2 |
|
3% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
79.17% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Carters Beach TOP 10 Holiday Park face-to-face reviews is 79.17% and is based on 72 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
86.82%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Debbie | 10/10 | 359 days | 100% |
| Phil | 1/10 | 390 days | 40% |
| Sascha Doobe | 7/10 | 481 days | 87% |
| Charlie | 9/10 | 725 days | 75% |
| Roger Heckly | 10/10 | 784 days | 70% |
| ElizabethE | 10/10 | 815 days | 67% |
| Charlotte Houël | 10/10 | 815 days | 67% |
| Erin Cheng | 10/10 | 846 days | 64% |
| Pierre Marty | 10/10 | 876 days | 61% |
| Caolan Harvey | 8/10 | 876 days | 59% |
| Lewis | 9/10 | 1090 days | 38% |
| Hungrydog | 8/10 | 1149 days | 33% |
| Michele | 6/10 | 1486 days | 10% |
| Stef | 8/10 | 1486 days | 12% |
| Andrew | 10/10 | 1545 days | 10% |
| Kris Day | 10/10 | 1606 days | 8% |
| Joe Johnson | 9/10 | 1637 days | 7% |
| Shar-ron & Jim | 10/10 | 1667 days | 7% |
| Kerry | 8/10 | 1851 days | 5% |
| Emma & Tom | 10/10 | 2186 days | 4% |
| TP&MM | 8/10 | 2217 days | 4% |
| Margie | 9/10 | 2307 days | 4% |
| Australia | 10/10 | 2337 days | 4% |
| H. Shela | 9/10 | 2368 days | 4% |
| Kenza | 9/10 | 2368 days | 4% |
| The Weathersons | 8/10 | 2595 days | 3% |
| Jill McGrath | 8/10 | 2605 days | 3% |
| Shira LA | 8/10 | 2610 days | 3% |
| Geoff Steele | 8/10 | 2762 days | 3% |
| Andy Kubic | 4/10 | 2953 days | 2% |
| Adam Emily | 9/10 | 2996 days | 2% |
| estelle D | 7/10 | 3036 days | 2% |
| S E | 1/10 | 3066 days | 1% |
| Pep Elo | 1/10 | 3066 days | 1% |
| Chloe Cox | 8/10 | 3187 days | 2% |
| Julia Redecke | 10/10 | 3292 days | 2% |
| Jean marc Daubenfeld | 10/10 | 3368 days | 2% |
| Matthew Hallowell | 4/10 | 3369 days | 1% |
| Sarah Paddington | 9/10 | 3550 days | 1% |
| Olivier Joubert | 6/10 | 3632 days | 1% |
| Vincent S. | 8/10 | 3677 days | 1% |
| holidaymad from Solihull | 5/10 | 3736 days | 1% |
| Gianpiero Rodari | 10/10 | 3797 days | 1% |
| Michael Bird | 8/10 | 3890 days | 1% |
| Ara Moore-Tuwhangai | 10/10 | 3982 days | 0% |
| Tiit Pullerits | 9/10 | 4058 days | 0% |
| Marion Busch | 7/10 | 4058 days | 0% |
| GARRYBLOWER | 10/10 | 4102 days | 0% |
| Nigel & Annie Dale | 7/10 | 4163 days | 0% |
| Mike Edwards | 3/10 | 4483 days | 0% |
| Charliepot | 6/10 | 4498 days | 1% |
| Steve and Therese Dunne | 9/10 | 4510 days | 1% |
| David | 10/10 | 4528 days | 1% |
| gareth williams | 8/10 | 4559 days | 1% |
| Tuibaby22 | 5/10 | 4589 days | 0% |
| E Wolfger | 10/10 | 4765 days | 1% |
| Michael & Janet | 8/10 | 4783 days | 1% |
| Patrick Grant | 8/10 | 4783 days | 1% |
| Stam | 7/10 | 4784 days | 1% |
| Kolen | 10/10 | 4785 days | 1% |
| Randewyk | 5/10 | 4786 days | 0% |
| David & Sue Lokkerbol | 7/10 | 4788 days | 1% |
| Jurg Pfaendler | 7/10 | 4790 days | 1% |
| Steve Goodyear | 8/10 | 4794 days | 1% |
| Michael Charleston | 10/10 | 4796 days | 1% |
| Josh | 7/10 | 4876 days | 1% |
| damaca | 8/10 | 4955 days | 1% |
| Sabine Tippman | 8/10 | 5125 days | 1% |
| Robin Adair | 7/10 | 5126 days | 1% |
| Steve & Pearl Baker | 8/10 | 5129 days | 1% |
| Malcolm McLean | 4/10 | 5129 days | 0% |
| Chris & Anne Pearson | 5/10 | 5133 days | 0% |
| Raith | 8/10 | 5138 days | 1% |
| katjarege | 7/10 | 5139 days | 1% |
| Stephen Jones | 10/10 | 5139 days | 1% |
| Daniela Borter | 4/10 | 5140 days | 0% |
| Becky Foley | 5/10 | 5153 days | 0% |
| Eduard Wikidal | 9/10 | 5154 days | 1% |
| Ross Hughes | 7/10 | 5158 days | 1% |
| Jackie Morris | 7/10 | 5158 days | 1% |
| Chris | 3/10 | 5159 days | 0% |
| Remco Smit | 10/10 | 5163 days | 1% |
| Wijnhoven | 1/10 | 5164 days | 0% |
| KieranE | 8/10 | 5443 days | 1% |
| paulag | 8/10 | 5443 days | 1% |
| June | 9/10 | 5473 days | 1% |
| Fabrice Modin | 9/10 | 5482 days | 1% |
| maggie Webster | 8/10 | 5490 days | 1% |
| Polil | 8/10 | 5490 days | 1% |
| Evans | 7/10 | 5492 days | 1% |
| Chris el capitan | 5/10 | 5509 days | 0% |
| David | 10/10 | 5511 days | 1% |
| Wielink | 8/10 | 5512 days | 1% |
| Wilbert Germ | 10/10 | 5517 days | 1% |
| Jackie | 10/10 | 5523 days | 1% |
| Kevin and Teresa | 8/10 | 5532 days | 1% |
| Hugli | 10/10 | 5537 days | 1% |
| Allan Bond | 8/10 | 5538 days | 1% |
| Wolfgang G | 10/10 | 5538 days | 1% |
| Peter Ritu | 10/10 | 5538 days | 1% |
| uleugel | 8/10 | 5541 days | 1% |
| Peter Ortner | 8/10 | 5541 days | 1% |
| Catherine Clavel | 8/10 | 5541 days | 1% |
| Jeannot Robert | 10/10 | 5542 days | 1% |
| Richard Pearson | 8/10 | 5542 days | 1% |
| cees juffermans | 8/10 | 5545 days | 1% |
| Beute Jacob | 9/10 | 5545 days | 1% |
| Jakob Jurgen | 10/10 | 5546 days | 1% |
| Sandy Doodson | 8/10 | 5546 days | 1% |
| E.M. Prideaux | 10/10 | 5546 days | 1% |
| Lynette Sal | 9/10 | 5548 days | 1% |
| Johan Vaartjes | 7/10 | 5548 days | 1% |
| Sabine Locker | 9/10 | 5548 days | 1% |
| Stevens Frans | 6/10 | 5549 days | 1% |
| John Borneman | 8/10 | 5549 days | 1% |
| Torsten Gehrke | 10/10 | 5549 days | 1% |
| Greg Kennedy | 10/10 | 5551 days | 1% |
| Florian Knoepfel | 9/10 | 5552 days | 1% |
| Helen and Hans Walser | 10/10 | 5552 days | 1% |
| alanvn | 8/10 | 5707 days | 1% |
| Barry Treve | 9/10 | 5845 days | 1% |
| KathrinS | 7/10 | 5858 days | 1% |
| VolkerS | 9/10 | 5872 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 Carters Beach TOP 10 Holiday Park experience has plenty of reviews and does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
Recent Reviews Adjustment
-3.84% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 59 days. However the Carters Beach TOP 10 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 Carters Beach TOP 10 Holiday Park experience has been adjusted for 200 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 197 | -3.78% |
| 198 | -3.80% |
| 199 | -3.82% |
| 200 | -3.84% |
| 201 | -3.86% |
| 202 | -3.88% |
| 203 | -3.90% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
2.25% 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
85%
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.