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 Alpine Pacific 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.
Alpine Pacific Holiday Park
Valid Reviews
117 Valid Reviews
The Alpine Pacific Holiday Park experience has a total of 121 reviews. There are 117 valid reviews that are included when calculating the ranking score and 4 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 117 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 30 |
|
26% |
| 9/10 | 38 |
|
32% |
| 8/10 | 23 |
|
20% |
| 7/10 | 8 |
|
7% |
| 6/10 | 5 |
|
4% |
| 5/10 | 4 |
|
3% |
| 4/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 3/10 | 6 |
|
5% |
| 2/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 1/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
81.79% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Alpine Pacific Holiday Park valid reviews is 81.79% and is based on 117 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
45 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 117 valid reviews, the experience has 45 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 45 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 11 |
|
24% |
| 9/10 | 15 |
|
33% |
| 8/10 | 10 |
|
22% |
| 7/10 | 3 |
|
7% |
| 6/10 | 1 |
|
2% |
| 5/10 | 2 |
|
4% |
| 4/10 | 1 |
|
2% |
| 3/10 | 2 |
|
4% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
82.67% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Alpine Pacific Holiday Park face-to-face reviews is 82.67% and is based on 45 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
86.09%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| KnP | 10/10 | 79 days | 100% |
| Fabienne | 9/10 | 201 days | 97% |
| Pauline | 7/10 | 230 days | 91% |
| Wil | 8/10 | 292 days | 94% |
| Chris Ellis | 3/10 | 292 days | 52% |
| Eugenie van der Heijden | 8/10 | 322 days | 93% |
| Christian Geiling | 10/10 | 353 days | 93% |
| Marie Perret | 10/10 | 383 days | 92% |
| Lachlan | 10/10 | 475 days | 87% |
| DBennie | 8/10 | 506 days | 84% |
| Pond | 8/10 | 506 days | 84% |
| Miemil | 10/10 | 506 days | 86% |
| Ross Moles | 9/10 | 536 days | 83% |
| Charlie | 9/10 | 536 days | 83% |
| Courtney Gearhart | 3/10 | 595 days | 44% |
| Arie | 6/10 | 595 days | 69% |
| Haze | 8/10 | 595 days | 78% |
| Nicole | 9/10 | 657 days | 75% |
| Amy Shoemake | 10/10 | 657 days | 76% |
| Lara | 10/10 | 718 days | 71% |
| Hannah and Matthew | 10/10 | 779 days | 66% |
| Darrell | 10/10 | 932 days | 51% |
| AMR | 10/10 | 1022 days | 42% |
| Emma | 10/10 | 1325 days | 19% |
| Lisa | 2/10 | 1356 days | 8% |
| Ying | 9/10 | 1478 days | 12% |
| Liz Wade | 6/10 | 1690 days | 5% |
| Niko Schachner | 10/10 | 1721 days | 6% |
| Jenny | 9/10 | 1783 days | 5% |
| Becca | 9/10 | 1936 days | 5% |
| Margie | 8/10 | 2118 days | 4% |
| Ella | 9/10 | 2332 days | 4% |
| Bex & Jake | 9/10 | 2332 days | 4% |
| JAMES FRANCO | 1/10 | 2362 days | 1% |
| keyslayer | 5/10 | 2362 days | 3% |
| Bailey Dunne | 10/10 | 2393 days | 4% |
| Benn | 9/10 | 2393 days | 4% |
| Patricia Stitchbury | 4/10 | 2420 days | 2% |
| Eversons | 8/10 | 2421 days | 4% |
| Keith Salway | 9/10 | 2432 days | 3% |
| Jan Schreuder | 9/10 | 2434 days | 4% |
| Kelly Zappia | 3/10 | 2551 days | 2% |
| Madelyn Fagerman | 10/10 | 2714 days | 3% |
| Maud Fredrikze | 9/10 | 2794 days | 3% |
| Aimee Theobald | 10/10 | 2847 days | 3% |
| Mallory Lopez | 8/10 | 3126 days | 2% |
| Gabor Kabacs | 9/10 | 3134 days | 2% |
| Sven Hasselberger | 8/10 | 3164 days | 2% |
| Lesa Price | 8/10 | 3273 days | 2% |
| Kate L | 10/10 | 3366 days | 2% |
| Nyla and Alan Ramsay | 10/10 | 3488 days | 2% |
| Isabel Seadon | 3/10 | 3511 days | 1% |
| Jurgen Moors | 6/10 | 3533 days | 1% |
| Stefanie Feldman | 7/10 | 3536 days | 1% |
| Bert Snel | 7/10 | 3578 days | 1% |
| David Cowling | 9/10 | 3598 days | 1% |
| John K | 9/10 | 3608 days | 1% |
| SUE COLEMAN | 8/10 | 3608 days | 1% |
| Gillian Scott | 7/10 | 3852 days | 1% |
| Andy Karl | 8/10 | 3913 days | 1% |
| catherine welsh | 7/10 | 3913 days | 1% |
| Paul Wood | 9/10 | 3944 days | 1% |
| andrewmh | 9/10 | 3944 days | 1% |
| Nigel & Annie Dale | 9/10 | 3974 days | 1% |
| Kerri | 9/10 | 4035 days | 1% |
| ozelmer | 6/10 | 4035 days | 0% |
| Julian_ont | 10/10 | 4247 days | 0% |
| Lis Bon | 8/10 | 4278 days | 0% |
| Sandra and Thomas | 10/10 | 4297 days | 0% |
| Jan | 9/10 | 4297 days | 0% |
| Urs Kloter | 6/10 | 4300 days | 0% |
| Joanna | 10/10 | 4315 days | 0% |
| Esther Goh | 9/10 | 4523 days | 1% |
| Moni01 | 5/10 | 4553 days | 1% |
| Sander Heike | 7/10 | 4556 days | 1% |
| Harald | 10/10 | 4593 days | 1% |
| Inge & Erik | 9/10 | 4594 days | 1% |
| Nicholas Prakenhammar | 8/10 | 4597 days | 1% |
| Schertenleib | 9/10 | 4600 days | 1% |
| Heewin Otten | 8/10 | 4606 days | 1% |
| Rocco Christian | 9/10 | 4607 days | 1% |
| mawueth | 9/10 | 4644 days | 1% |
| Scott & Madeleine Bancroft | 10/10 | 4695 days | 1% |
| Sid | 7/10 | 4705 days | 1% |
| Res Kormann | 10/10 | 4908 days | 1% |
| angillie | 9/10 | 4919 days | 1% |
| Jon_and_Family | 9/10 | 4919 days | 1% |
| Brian & Di | 9/10 | 4932 days | 1% |
| Beat & Connie | 10/10 | 4944 days | 1% |
| Jacob Nube | 8/10 | 4946 days | 1% |
| Erland Ostberg | 3/10 | 4952 days | 0% |
| Rolf Homeyer | 5/10 | 4969 days | 1% |
| dollimyxture | 10/10 | 5040 days | 1% |
| Marie | 9/10 | 5284 days | 1% |
| Tony B | 5/10 | 5296 days | 1% |
| Helen T | 9/10 | 5310 days | 1% |
| Tony Geens | 8/10 | 5316 days | 1% |
| Natalie & Simon King | 8/10 | 5318 days | 1% |
| Henk | 7/10 | 5334 days | 1% |
| Emily Walters | 9/10 | 5341 days | 1% |
| Yvonne Ing | 9/10 | 5342 days | 1% |
| Marian Demients-deJongh | 9/10 | 5356 days | 1% |
| Hans Hoff | 9/10 | 5413 days | 1% |
| Gina Swindells | 10/10 | 5416 days | 1% |
| Katrin Wennin | 10/10 | 5416 days | 1% |
| Flavia Mionelli | 10/10 | 5417 days | 1% |
| Vicki Cashmore | 10/10 | 5417 days | 1% |
| Sara Reekmans | 9/10 | 5428 days | 1% |
| Kaye | 8/10 | 5649 days | 1% |
| JanL | 10/10 | 5649 days | 1% |
| ChrisD | 9/10 | 5665 days | 1% |
| GingerPrince | 9/10 | 5683 days | 1% |
| CarleyJ | 8/10 | 5683 days | 1% |
| Steven | 8/10 | 5683 days | 1% |
| RosC | 8/10 | 5684 days | 1% |
| Frank | 8/10 | 5692 days | 1% |
| Heath | 3/10 | 5694 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 Alpine Pacific Holiday Park experience has plenty of reviews and does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
Recent Reviews Adjustment
-0.80% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 75 days. However the Alpine Pacific 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 Alpine Pacific Holiday Park experience has been adjusted for 53 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 50 | -0.75% |
| 51 | -0.77% |
| 52 | -0.78% |
| 53 | -0.80% |
| 54 | -0.81% |
| 55 | -0.83% |
| 56 | -0.84% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
1.77% 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
87%
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.