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 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
77.79%
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 | 308 days | 100% |
| RM | 3/10 | 370 days | 53% |
| Aoife | 9/10 | 431 days | 94% |
| Matt H | 8/10 | 889 days | 57% |
| Judy | 10/10 | 950 days | 51% |
| Miemil | 1/10 | 950 days | 21% |
| Stephanie | 1/10 | 1039 days | 17% |
| Jouke | 9/10 | 1131 days | 34% |
| Felix | 7/10 | 1800 days | 5% |
| Andrew Hammond | 8/10 | 2288 days | 4% |
| Lisanne | 4/10 | 2411 days | 3% |
| Kate | 7/10 | 2411 days | 4% |
| Beth | 9/10 | 2500 days | 4% |
| Regina | 8/10 | 2531 days | 4% |
| Angela | 8/10 | 2623 days | 4% |
| Ray Tombs | 9/10 | 2806 days | 3% |
| Michael McMahon | 10/10 | 2806 days | 3% |
| Shira LA | 9/10 | 2865 days | 3% |
| Claire Hodges | 6/10 | 2875 days | 3% |
| Alecsandra Dimofte | 6/10 | 2909 days | 3% |
| Emilie Krasowski | 8/10 | 2915 days | 3% |
| Gary Prescot | 7/10 | 2990 days | 3% |
| Vanessa Stubbs | 8/10 | 3014 days | 3% |
| c mccabe | 8/10 | 3049 days | 3% |
| Chris Nugent | 6/10 | 3132 days | 2% |
| Francis Williams | 9/10 | 3245 days | 2% |
| Luke Young | 9/10 | 3405 days | 2% |
| Aaron Gunning | 5/10 | 3563 days | 1% |
| Jane Louise Stokes | 9/10 | 3581 days | 2% |
| Glinys Weller | 9/10 | 3607 days | 2% |
| Jean marc Daubenfeld | 8/10 | 3621 days | 1% |
| Dennis Biedermann | 5/10 | 3718 days | 1% |
| Melissa Darlington | 10/10 | 3724 days | 1% |
| Stephanie | 9/10 | 3860 days | 1% |
| Erica b | 5/10 | 3901 days | 1% |
| Sam Smith | 8/10 | 3932 days | 1% |
| Andrew Cruickshank | 9/10 | 3932 days | 1% |
| Nonrev | 8/10 | 3960 days | 1% |
| Nina Müller | 6/10 | 3960 days | 1% |
| Kim Frey | 6/10 | 3996 days | 1% |
| Bjorn Privat | 2/10 | 4014 days | 0% |
| neil holdaway | 6/10 | 4022 days | 1% |
| Jacques Revel | 6/10 | 4268 days | 0% |
| Matusala Habtemariam | 8/10 | 4322 days | 0% |
| B D | 6/10 | 4326 days | 0% |
| sreve | 6/10 | 4356 days | 0% |
| Andrew Cattanach | 6/10 | 4357 days | 0% |
| GARRYBLOWER | 9/10 | 4388 days | 1% |
| Alan Blackburn | 7/10 | 4388 days | 1% |
| PipandJon | 5/10 | 4418 days | 1% |
| Stewart Littleford | 9/10 | 4479 days | 1% |
| Grantygrant | 7/10 | 4632 days | 1% |
| ramy | 2/10 | 4632 days | 0% |
| Patrycja Polakowska | 8/10 | 4673 days | 1% |
| Willem de Jong | 9/10 | 4684 days | 1% |
| Michael Nolan | 8/10 | 4691 days | 1% |
| Stripeyfish | 1/10 | 4722 days | 0% |
| Rob | 6/10 | 4739 days | 1% |
| Fred and Carin | 6/10 | 4742 days | 1% |
| Urs Kloter | 9/10 | 4744 days | 1% |
| Toby Clark | 9/10 | 5020 days | 1% |
| launch | 7/10 | 5028 days | 1% |
| Richard and Janet | 7/10 | 5031 days | 1% |
| Jeltje | 6/10 | 5037 days | 1% |
| Josef | 7/10 | 5038 days | 1% |
| Jim Addicott | 4/10 | 5041 days | 1% |
| Jim Delacruz | 8/10 | 5043 days | 1% |
| Horst Langstein | 8/10 | 5050 days | 1% |
| Frank Krivauek | 5/10 | 5051 days | 1% |
| Thyg Lingdal | 9/10 | 5056 days | 1% |
| Colin Jenkins | 7/10 | 5068 days | 1% |
| Herbert | 9/10 | 5070 days | 1% |
| Jackie & Ray | 10/10 | 5070 days | 1% |
| Fred Saunders | 10/10 | 5083 days | 1% |
| CMJ | 8/10 | 5088 days | 1% |
| Harry Simpson | 6/10 | 5126 days | 1% |
| Ruth & Derrick | 6/10 | 5132 days | 1% |
| Peter Spooner | 9/10 | 5136 days | 1% |
| Tamara | 8/10 | 5149 days | 1% |
| Jason Ritenour | 8/10 | 5210 days | 1% |
| qofd | 8/10 | 5333 days | 1% |
| Ilse & Thys | 7/10 | 5377 days | 1% |
| Victoria Boolsen | 10/10 | 5386 days | 1% |
| Malin Emanuelsson | 8/10 | 5397 days | 1% |
| Brian Clothier | 10/10 | 5398 days | 1% |
| D Hoekstra | 8/10 | 5417 days | 1% |
| Gerry Nichols | 9/10 | 5417 days | 1% |
| Mr & Mrs Winter | 9/10 | 5417 days | 1% |
| H Schepers | 8/10 | 5418 days | 1% |
| hendrik king | 7/10 | 5453 days | 1% |
| Mikeminch | 8/10 | 5484 days | 1% |
| kristy | 9/10 | 5545 days | 1% |
| Andrew Hammond | 9/10 | 5545 days | 1% |
| Zac Morris | 10/10 | 5575 days | 1% |
| Don & Geraldine | 7/10 | 5734 days | 1% |
| Brett & Tanille | 10/10 | 5747 days | 1% |
| Janny en Bert | 8/10 | 5749 days | 1% |
| Westermann | 4/10 | 5750 days | 1% |
| Shirley C | 8/10 | 5751 days | 1% |
| Pam Know | 5/10 | 5754 days | 1% |
| Colin Daniels | 5/10 | 5761 days | 1% |
| Janny Meerdinnk Veldboow | 8/10 | 5765 days | 1% |
| Bert Tonwen | 8/10 | 5768 days | 1% |
| Dale King | 7/10 | 5768 days | 1% |
| Dieter Groscurth | 8/10 | 5769 days | 1% |
| Gordon and Joyce | 10/10 | 5769 days | 1% |
| Yona | 7/10 | 5773 days | 1% |
| Pascal Auber | 10/10 | 5773 days | 1% |
| Silvia Kern | 9/10 | 5781 days | 1% |
| R Gilge | 9/10 | 5783 days | 1% |
| Nicole | 9/10 | 5784 days | 1% |
| Frances Hay | 7/10 | 5786 days | 1% |
| Paul Frew | 7/10 | 5796 days | 1% |
| Catherine Clavel | 7/10 | 5796 days | 1% |
| John J | 8/10 | 5801 days | 1% |
| Heino keyssler | 10/10 | 5807 days | 1% |
| middendorp | 8/10 | 5833 days | 1% |
| Robbertsen | 7/10 | 5841 days | 1% |
| Kirsty McGrath | 8/10 | 5853 days | 1% |
| Simon Bartholomew | 9/10 | 5861 days | 1% |
| Daniel Alonso | 10/10 | 5861 days | 1% |
| Ana Garcia | 10/10 | 5862 days | 1% |
| X Neils | 8/10 | 5871 days | 1% |
| Emily and Alex | 8/10 | 5876 days | 1% |
| PatH | 10/10 | 5893 days | 1% |
| Kazmeister | 7/10 | 6032 days | 1% |
| Johnnie | 8/10 | 6074 days | 1% |
| RussC | 7/10 | 6085 days | 1% |
| SteveB | 5/10 | 6093 days | 1% |
| Becca1 | 10/10 | 6095 days | 1% |
| RonB | 7/10 | 6105 days | 1% |
| Christine | 8/10 | 6106 days | 1% |
| LucyPoland | 9/10 | 6113 days | 1% |
| Suzie Lechner | 9/10 | 6113 days | 1% |
| ChrisWeb | 7/10 | 6127 days | 1% |
| VolkerS | 9/10 | 6127 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
-4.07% 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 | -4.01% |
| 198 | -4.03% |
| 199 | -4.05% |
| 200 | -4.07% |
| 201 | -4.09% |
| 202 | -4.11% |
| 203 | -4.13% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
5.17% 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.