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 Christchurch Tasman Holiday Parks.
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.
Christchurch Tasman Holiday Parks
Valid Reviews
136 Valid Reviews
The Christchurch Tasman Holiday Parks experience has a total of 138 reviews. There are 136 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 136 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 17 |
|
13% |
| 9/10 | 30 |
|
22% |
| 8/10 | 35 |
|
26% |
| 7/10 | 22 |
|
16% |
| 6/10 | 15 |
|
11% |
| 5/10 | 8 |
|
6% |
| 4/10 | 3 |
|
2% |
| 3/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 2/10 | 2 |
|
1% |
| 1/10 | 3 |
|
2% |
75.44% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Christchurch Tasman Holiday Parks valid reviews is 75.44% and is based on 136 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
75 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 136 valid reviews, the experience has 75 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 75 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 12 |
|
16% |
| 9/10 | 16 |
|
21% |
| 8/10 | 20 |
|
27% |
| 7/10 | 14 |
|
19% |
| 6/10 | 7 |
|
9% |
| 5/10 | 4 |
|
5% |
| 4/10 | 2 |
|
3% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
78.93% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Christchurch Tasman Holiday Parks face-to-face reviews is 78.93% and is based on 75 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
77.83%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mark B | 10/10 | 320 days | 100% |
| RM | 3/10 | 382 days | 53% |
| Aoife | 9/10 | 443 days | 93% |
| Matt H | 8/10 | 901 days | 56% |
| Judy | 10/10 | 962 days | 50% |
| Miemil | 1/10 | 962 days | 20% |
| Stephanie | 1/10 | 1051 days | 17% |
| Jouke | 9/10 | 1143 days | 33% |
| Felix | 7/10 | 1812 days | 5% |
| Andrew Hammond | 8/10 | 2300 days | 4% |
| Lisanne | 4/10 | 2423 days | 3% |
| Kate | 7/10 | 2423 days | 4% |
| Beth | 9/10 | 2512 days | 4% |
| Regina | 8/10 | 2543 days | 4% |
| Angela | 8/10 | 2635 days | 4% |
| Ray Tombs | 9/10 | 2818 days | 3% |
| Michael McMahon | 10/10 | 2818 days | 3% |
| Shira LA | 9/10 | 2877 days | 3% |
| Claire Hodges | 6/10 | 2887 days | 3% |
| Alecsandra Dimofte | 6/10 | 2921 days | 3% |
| Emilie Krasowski | 8/10 | 2927 days | 3% |
| Gary Prescot | 7/10 | 3002 days | 3% |
| Vanessa Stubbs | 8/10 | 3026 days | 3% |
| c mccabe | 8/10 | 3061 days | 3% |
| Chris Nugent | 6/10 | 3144 days | 2% |
| Francis Williams | 9/10 | 3257 days | 2% |
| Luke Young | 9/10 | 3417 days | 2% |
| Aaron Gunning | 5/10 | 3575 days | 1% |
| Jane Louise Stokes | 9/10 | 3593 days | 2% |
| Glinys Weller | 9/10 | 3619 days | 2% |
| Jean marc Daubenfeld | 8/10 | 3633 days | 2% |
| Dennis Biedermann | 5/10 | 3730 days | 1% |
| Melissa Darlington | 10/10 | 3736 days | 1% |
| Stephanie | 9/10 | 3872 days | 1% |
| Erica b | 5/10 | 3914 days | 1% |
| Sam Smith | 8/10 | 3945 days | 1% |
| Andrew Cruickshank | 9/10 | 3945 days | 1% |
| Nonrev | 8/10 | 3973 days | 1% |
| Nina Müller | 6/10 | 3973 days | 1% |
| Kim Frey | 6/10 | 4008 days | 1% |
| Bjorn Privat | 2/10 | 4026 days | 0% |
| neil holdaway | 6/10 | 4035 days | 1% |
| Jacques Revel | 6/10 | 4280 days | 0% |
| Matusala Habtemariam | 8/10 | 4334 days | 0% |
| B D | 6/10 | 4338 days | 0% |
| sreve | 6/10 | 4369 days | 0% |
| Andrew Cattanach | 6/10 | 4369 days | 0% |
| GARRYBLOWER | 9/10 | 4400 days | 1% |
| Alan Blackburn | 7/10 | 4400 days | 1% |
| PipandJon | 5/10 | 4430 days | 1% |
| Stewart Littleford | 9/10 | 4491 days | 1% |
| Grantygrant | 7/10 | 4644 days | 1% |
| ramy | 2/10 | 4644 days | 0% |
| Patrycja Polakowska | 8/10 | 4685 days | 1% |
| Willem de Jong | 9/10 | 4696 days | 1% |
| Michael Nolan | 8/10 | 4703 days | 1% |
| Stripeyfish | 1/10 | 4734 days | 0% |
| Rob | 6/10 | 4751 days | 1% |
| Fred and Carin | 6/10 | 4754 days | 1% |
| Urs Kloter | 9/10 | 4756 days | 1% |
| Toby Clark | 9/10 | 5032 days | 1% |
| launch | 7/10 | 5040 days | 1% |
| Richard and Janet | 7/10 | 5043 days | 1% |
| Jeltje | 6/10 | 5049 days | 1% |
| Josef | 7/10 | 5050 days | 1% |
| Jim Addicott | 4/10 | 5053 days | 1% |
| Jim Delacruz | 8/10 | 5055 days | 1% |
| Horst Langstein | 8/10 | 5062 days | 1% |
| Frank Krivauek | 5/10 | 5063 days | 1% |
| Thyg Lingdal | 9/10 | 5068 days | 1% |
| Colin Jenkins | 7/10 | 5080 days | 1% |
| Herbert | 9/10 | 5082 days | 1% |
| Jackie & Ray | 10/10 | 5082 days | 1% |
| Fred Saunders | 10/10 | 5095 days | 1% |
| CMJ | 8/10 | 5100 days | 1% |
| Harry Simpson | 6/10 | 5138 days | 1% |
| Ruth & Derrick | 6/10 | 5144 days | 1% |
| Peter Spooner | 9/10 | 5148 days | 1% |
| Tamara | 8/10 | 5161 days | 1% |
| Jason Ritenour | 8/10 | 5222 days | 1% |
| qofd | 8/10 | 5345 days | 1% |
| Ilse & Thys | 7/10 | 5389 days | 1% |
| Victoria Boolsen | 10/10 | 5398 days | 1% |
| Malin Emanuelsson | 8/10 | 5409 days | 1% |
| Brian Clothier | 10/10 | 5410 days | 1% |
| D Hoekstra | 8/10 | 5429 days | 1% |
| Gerry Nichols | 9/10 | 5429 days | 1% |
| Mr & Mrs Winter | 9/10 | 5429 days | 1% |
| H Schepers | 8/10 | 5430 days | 1% |
| hendrik king | 7/10 | 5465 days | 1% |
| Mikeminch | 8/10 | 5496 days | 1% |
| kristy | 9/10 | 5557 days | 1% |
| Andrew Hammond | 9/10 | 5557 days | 1% |
| Zac Morris | 10/10 | 5587 days | 1% |
| Don & Geraldine | 7/10 | 5746 days | 1% |
| Brett & Tanille | 10/10 | 5759 days | 1% |
| Janny en Bert | 8/10 | 5761 days | 1% |
| Westermann | 4/10 | 5762 days | 1% |
| Shirley C | 8/10 | 5763 days | 1% |
| Pam Know | 5/10 | 5766 days | 1% |
| Colin Daniels | 5/10 | 5773 days | 1% |
| Janny Meerdinnk Veldboow | 8/10 | 5777 days | 1% |
| Bert Tonwen | 8/10 | 5780 days | 1% |
| Dale King | 7/10 | 5780 days | 1% |
| Dieter Groscurth | 8/10 | 5781 days | 1% |
| Gordon and Joyce | 10/10 | 5781 days | 1% |
| Yona | 7/10 | 5785 days | 1% |
| Pascal Auber | 10/10 | 5785 days | 1% |
| Silvia Kern | 9/10 | 5793 days | 1% |
| R Gilge | 9/10 | 5795 days | 1% |
| Nicole | 9/10 | 5796 days | 1% |
| Frances Hay | 7/10 | 5798 days | 1% |
| Paul Frew | 7/10 | 5808 days | 1% |
| Catherine Clavel | 7/10 | 5808 days | 1% |
| John J | 8/10 | 5813 days | 1% |
| Heino keyssler | 10/10 | 5819 days | 1% |
| middendorp | 8/10 | 5845 days | 1% |
| Robbertsen | 7/10 | 5853 days | 1% |
| Kirsty McGrath | 8/10 | 5865 days | 1% |
| Simon Bartholomew | 9/10 | 5873 days | 1% |
| Daniel Alonso | 10/10 | 5873 days | 1% |
| Ana Garcia | 10/10 | 5874 days | 1% |
| X Neils | 8/10 | 5883 days | 1% |
| Emily and Alex | 8/10 | 5888 days | 1% |
| PatH | 10/10 | 5905 days | 1% |
| Kazmeister | 7/10 | 6044 days | 1% |
| Johnnie | 8/10 | 6086 days | 1% |
| RussC | 7/10 | 6097 days | 1% |
| SteveB | 5/10 | 6105 days | 1% |
| Becca1 | 10/10 | 6107 days | 1% |
| RonB | 7/10 | 6117 days | 1% |
| Christine | 8/10 | 6118 days | 1% |
| LucyPoland | 9/10 | 6125 days | 1% |
| Suzie Lechner | 9/10 | 6125 days | 1% |
| ChrisWeb | 7/10 | 6139 days | 1% |
| VolkerS | 9/10 | 6139 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 Christchurch Tasman Holiday Parks experience has plenty of reviews and does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
Recent Reviews Adjustment
-4.05% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 42 days. However the Christchurch Tasman Holiday Parks 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 Christchurch Tasman Holiday Parks experience has been adjusted for 200 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 197 | -3.99% |
| 198 | -4.01% |
| 199 | -4.03% |
| 200 | -4.05% |
| 201 | -4.07% |
| 202 | -4.09% |
| 203 | -4.11% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
5.15% 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
79%
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.