G'day, 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 Hanmer Springs 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.
119 Valid Reviews
The Hanmer Springs TOP 10 Holiday Park experience has a total of 123 reviews. There are 119 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 119 valid reviews:
Rating | Count | Percentage | |
---|---|---|---|
10/10 | 16 |
|
13% |
9/10 | 30 |
|
25% |
8/10 | 28 |
|
24% |
7/10 | 23 |
|
19% |
6/10 | 12 |
|
10% |
5/10 | 6 |
|
5% |
4/10 | 2 |
|
2% |
3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
2/10 | 2 |
|
2% |
1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
78.07% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Hanmer Springs TOP 10 Holiday Park valid reviews is 78.07% and is based on 119 valid reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here as a comparison to the weighted average.
68 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 119 valid reviews, the experience has 68 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 68 face-to-face reviews:
Rating | Count | Percentage | |
---|---|---|---|
10/10 | 5 |
|
7% |
9/10 | 20 |
|
29% |
8/10 | 19 |
|
28% |
7/10 | 15 |
|
22% |
6/10 | 5 |
|
7% |
5/10 | 3 |
|
4% |
4/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
78.82% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Hanmer Springs TOP 10 Holiday Park face-to-face reviews is 78.82% and is based on 68 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
86.95%
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 |
---|---|---|---|
Brett | 10/10 | 172 days | 100% |
Kay | 9/10 | 325 days | 95% |
Sander & Eva | 2/10 | 416 days | 42% |
Tracy | 10/10 | 722 days | 71% |
Stefanie Dry | 10/10 | 722 days | 71% |
Hannah White | 10/10 | 750 days | 69% |
Tom&Rach | 7/10 | 781 days | 62% |
Toni Brown | 10/10 | 934 days | 51% |
Clive | 10/10 | 1511 days | 11% |
Sheri | 10/10 | 1938 days | 5% |
Tim | 4/10 | 2273 days | 3% |
Margie | 7/10 | 2273 days | 4% |
Samantha H. | 7/10 | 2273 days | 4% |
Demi Thompson | 9/10 | 2303 days | 4% |
Erin Ueffing | 6/10 | 2517 days | 3% |
Shira LA | 6/10 | 2576 days | 3% |
Nick Gifford | 8/10 | 2599 days | 3% |
Paul and Paula | 8/10 | 2631 days | 3% |
Tammy Schein | 8/10 | 2667 days | 3% |
Gary Prescot | 9/10 | 2701 days | 3% |
Lei Horton | 10/10 | 2769 days | 3% |
Joanne Haslam | 8/10 | 2784 days | 3% |
Grace White | 9/10 | 2869 days | 3% |
Janet Pentelow | 5/10 | 2874 days | 2% |
Peter Moore | 8/10 | 3013 days | 3% |
Sheryl Hicks | 9/10 | 3029 days | 3% |
Victoria Wells | 6/10 | 3062 days | 2% |
Belinda Clarke | 9/10 | 3191 days | 2% |
Kelly Hitchins | 9/10 | 3250 days | 2% |
Michael Menrath | 2/10 | 3269 days | 1% |
Jakob Kofoed | 8/10 | 3327 days | 2% |
Brian Sandri | 6/10 | 3353 days | 2% |
Lesa Price | 7/10 | 3428 days | 2% |
George n Sue | 9/10 | 3495 days | 2% |
Christian Fassler | 5/10 | 3651 days | 1% |
Andrew Cruickshank | 10/10 | 3671 days | 1% |
Judi Gilchrist | 6/10 | 3695 days | 1% |
Kane F | 6/10 | 3794 days | 1% |
Fabian Rodriguez | 7/10 | 3917 days | 1% |
GARRYBLOWER | 10/10 | 4099 days | 1% |
Driver Dan | 9/10 | 4282 days | 0% |
Elise Robson | 6/10 | 4282 days | 0% |
Ken Milligan | 9/10 | 4361 days | 0% |
Michael Nolan | 8/10 | 4374 days | 0% |
Lis Bon | 9/10 | 4433 days | 1% |
Jason | 4/10 | 4451 days | 1% |
Sandra and Thomas | 9/10 | 4452 days | 1% |
Jackie and Brian | 7/10 | 4456 days | 1% |
F Soppelsa | 7/10 | 4457 days | 1% |
Rolf Zwahlen | 9/10 | 4471 days | 1% |
Steve and Therese Dunne | 8/10 | 4476 days | 1% |
phudgb | 7/10 | 4525 days | 1% |
kramp1 | 6/10 | 4678 days | 1% |
Green UK | 7/10 | 4720 days | 1% |
Peter Adams | 8/10 | 4733 days | 1% |
D Esson | 9/10 | 4733 days | 1% |
Brasier | 9/10 | 4745 days | 1% |
Bottoms | 7/10 | 4749 days | 1% |
Cole | 9/10 | 4750 days | 1% |
Orlando | 7/10 | 4751 days | 1% |
Joschko | 8/10 | 4751 days | 1% |
Astrid Boon | 8/10 | 4753 days | 1% |
Andy & Lynnie Nevin | 7/10 | 4762 days | 1% |
Patricia Motzheim | 10/10 | 4767 days | 1% |
Balonno | 5/10 | 4768 days | 1% |
Katie K | 8/10 | 4777 days | 1% |
Kai | 9/10 | 4836 days | 1% |
Deirdre Hayes | 6/10 | 4836 days | 1% |
Johanna Maria Brigitta | 8/10 | 4845 days | 1% |
Edward Marhi | 9/10 | 5071 days | 1% |
Weez18 | 7/10 | 5074 days | 1% |
Jorren | 8/10 | 5083 days | 1% |
Brian & Di | 7/10 | 5087 days | 1% |
Gronewold Harm-Dierchs | 9/10 | 5089 days | 1% |
Wayne Forrow | 7/10 | 5095 days | 1% |
Chris & Anne Pearson | 7/10 | 5099 days | 1% |
Stephen Shearer | 9/10 | 5102 days | 1% |
Anita Tonks | 5/10 | 5104 days | 1% |
Victoria Purver | 8/10 | 5108 days | 1% |
Mark | 8/10 | 5112 days | 1% |
Horton Fawkes | 8/10 | 5124 days | 1% |
Dan Aldridge | 9/10 | 5126 days | 1% |
Jason Hernandez | 9/10 | 5126 days | 1% |
Steve & Susan Allan | 5/10 | 5130 days | 1% |
kristy | 8/10 | 5256 days | 1% |
Jane and Dave | 8/10 | 5406 days | 1% |
June | 6/10 | 5439 days | 1% |
Tim Smith | 5/10 | 5461 days | 1% |
A Libbis | 8/10 | 5462 days | 1% |
Tanya Fitzgibbon | 7/10 | 5471 days | 1% |
Zareua Boree | 7/10 | 5473 days | 1% |
Senel | 9/10 | 5477 days | 1% |
Faurack | 9/10 | 5477 days | 1% |
Helen B | 9/10 | 5480 days | 1% |
Robert Trostle | 7/10 | 5483 days | 1% |
Vincente Garrido | 8/10 | 5493 days | 1% |
Mrs Russon | 8/10 | 5495 days | 1% |
Petra Berrens | 8/10 | 5496 days | 1% |
Marie Jack | 6/10 | 5497 days | 1% |
Catherine Clavel | 8/10 | 5507 days | 1% |
helennz | 9/10 | 5514 days | 1% |
Greg Kennedy | 9/10 | 5517 days | 1% |
Heino keyssler | 10/10 | 5518 days | 1% |
Florian Knoepfel | 6/10 | 5518 days | 1% |
stevnba | 9/10 | 5545 days | 1% |
varenaee | 10/10 | 5545 days | 1% |
Robbertsen | 7/10 | 5552 days | 1% |
mdarras | 8/10 | 5564 days | 1% |
Sabrina Bazin | 10/10 | 5568 days | 1% |
Dermot Bryne | 8/10 | 5583 days | 1% |
woozie3 | 7/10 | 5682 days | 1% |
DustyLaptop | 10/10 | 5743 days | 1% |
Wight | 9/10 | 5802 days | 1% |
Russ C | 8/10 | 5804 days | 1% |
scottl | 10/10 | 5804 days | 1% |
Peter Jackie | 9/10 | 5807 days | 1% |
LauraN | 7/10 | 5821 days | 1% |
JolondaR | 7/10 | 5822 days | 1% |
Benzedi | 8/10 | 5822 days | 1% |
Several adjustments to the weighted average are added to improve relevancy and credibility. These adjustments apply equally to all experiences that meet the criteria.
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 Hanmer Springs TOP 10 Holiday Park experience has plenty of reviews and does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
-3.40% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 53 days. However the Hanmer Springs 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 Hanmer Springs TOP 10 Holiday Park experience has been adjusted for 164 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
Days | Adjustment |
---|---|
… | … |
161 | -3.34% |
162 | -3.36% |
163 | -3.38% |
164 | -3.40% |
165 | -3.42% |
166 | -3.44% |
167 | -3.46% |
… | … |
2.13% 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.
86%
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.