Hey, 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 Glentanner 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.
Glentanner Park
Valid Reviews
118 Valid Reviews
The Glentanner Park experience has a total of 120 reviews. There are 118 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 118 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 24 |
|
20% |
| 9/10 | 20 |
|
17% |
| 8/10 | 38 |
|
32% |
| 7/10 | 15 |
|
13% |
| 6/10 | 4 |
|
3% |
| 5/10 | 6 |
|
5% |
| 4/10 | 3 |
|
3% |
| 3/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 2/10 | 6 |
|
5% |
| 1/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
77.20% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Glentanner Park valid reviews is 77.20% and is based on 118 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
32 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 118 valid reviews, the experience has 32 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 32 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 7 |
|
22% |
| 9/10 | 6 |
|
19% |
| 8/10 | 11 |
|
34% |
| 7/10 | 4 |
|
13% |
| 6/10 | 1 |
|
3% |
| 5/10 | 1 |
|
3% |
| 4/10 | 1 |
|
3% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 1 |
|
3% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
80.31% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Glentanner Park face-to-face reviews is 80.31% and is based on 32 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
83.77%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Caron | 10/10 | 170 days | 100% |
| Vantrolls | 7/10 | 201 days | 92% |
| Monika | 10/10 | 201 days | 99% |
| Janet Lewis | 9/10 | 261 days | 97% |
| Marie Perret | 8/10 | 353 days | 93% |
| Dillon | 8/10 | 414 days | 90% |
| Dillon | 8/10 | 414 days | 90% |
| 小B | 5/10 | 536 days | 65% |
| Reiner Elze | 5/10 | 536 days | 65% |
| Esther | 10/10 | 595 days | 81% |
| Trui Waalwijk | 10/10 | 595 days | 81% |
| Jaycee | 8/10 | 626 days | 77% |
| Sophie Rellensmann | 6/10 | 626 days | 68% |
| Olivia | 10/10 | 626 days | 79% |
| RR | 9/10 | 657 days | 76% |
| Strider | 8/10 | 657 days | 75% |
| Yuvin | 10/10 | 748 days | 69% |
| Team Wright | 9/10 | 901 days | 54% |
| Lisa | 9/10 | 1083 days | 37% |
| Graham | 9/10 | 1387 days | 16% |
| Rach | 7/10 | 1417 days | 14% |
| Dulan | 8/10 | 1509 days | 11% |
| Carla | 10/10 | 1691 days | 6% |
| Ellie | 10/10 | 1691 days | 6% |
| Courtney | 9/10 | 1691 days | 6% |
| Erica | 8/10 | 1722 days | 6% |
| Tom Z. | 10/10 | 1722 days | 6% |
| Lola | 9/10 | 1783 days | 5% |
| Arnout | 7/10 | 1814 days | 5% |
| Camper | 2/10 | 1936 days | 2% |
| Ranjit | 8/10 | 1997 days | 5% |
| Maggie | 8/10 | 1997 days | 5% |
| Kosala Perera | 8/10 | 2056 days | 4% |
| Kimberly Boyle | 9/10 | 2056 days | 5% |
| Zoe | 8/10 | 2087 days | 4% |
| Kevin O'Brien | 7/10 | 2087 days | 4% |
| Ian | 9/10 | 2148 days | 4% |
| Robert | 7/10 | 2179 days | 4% |
| Shira LA | 2/10 | 2421 days | 2% |
| Leong Mee Yee | 5/10 | 2425 days | 2% |
| Alecsandra Ghita | 6/10 | 2459 days | 3% |
| Audrey Wong | 5/10 | 2460 days | 3% |
| Tay Dao Han | 10/10 | 2468 days | 4% |
| Katie Jansen | 2/10 | 2558 days | 2% |
| Vanessa Stubbs | 7/10 | 2570 days | 3% |
| Jill Sharpe | 1/10 | 2708 days | 1% |
| Victoria Strong | 7/10 | 2815 days | 3% |
| Martin Taylor | 10/10 | 2816 days | 3% |
| Alan Brown | 8/10 | 2817 days | 3% |
| Jane Powell | 2/10 | 2839 days | 1% |
| Darren Bolton | 4/10 | 2856 days | 2% |
| Zipora Risakotta | 7/10 | 2901 days | 3% |
| Donguk Chung | 10/10 | 3009 days | 3% |
| Al Hindley | 8/10 | 3121 days | 2% |
| Lay Tyng Chan | 7/10 | 3159 days | 2% |
| hendrik king | 8/10 | 3214 days | 2% |
| Sarah Gurney | 8/10 | 3234 days | 2% |
| Amy Steiger | 8/10 | 3336 days | 2% |
| Georgia Posar | 10/10 | 3404 days | 2% |
| Yvonne Wu | 8/10 | 3428 days | 2% |
| Wolfgang Rank | 8/10 | 3457 days | 2% |
| Andrew Cruickshank | 9/10 | 3489 days | 2% |
| Averil Brown | 8/10 | 3514 days | 2% |
| Robert Warner | 7/10 | 3517 days | 2% |
| misstassie | 8/10 | 3548 days | 2% |
| Fabian Rodriguez | 6/10 | 3762 days | 1% |
| Michelle K | 2/10 | 3793 days | 0% |
| Ara Moore-Tuwhangai | 8/10 | 3793 days | 1% |
| Brita Topp | 8/10 | 3854 days | 1% |
| Nicholas Ng | 3/10 | 3944 days | 0% |
| Cuz da Maori | 8/10 | 3944 days | 1% |
| griff griffiths | 10/10 | 3944 days | 1% |
| Mary | 4/10 | 4219 days | 0% |
| Cmi | 9/10 | 4278 days | 0% |
| David | 10/10 | 4339 days | 0% |
| sueadegizmo | 8/10 | 4492 days | 1% |
| elaineandbob | 5/10 | 4553 days | 1% |
| nicky2284 | 10/10 | 4553 days | 1% |
| Matthias Angela | 6/10 | 4578 days | 1% |
| Def Fem | 8/10 | 4579 days | 1% |
| Rick Moth | 7/10 | 4593 days | 1% |
| Dieter Mangold | 4/10 | 4596 days | 0% |
| John Hughes | 8/10 | 4605 days | 1% |
| Ursi Meier | 8/10 | 4607 days | 1% |
| Jessica Lane | 2/10 | 4610 days | 0% |
| Nicole van Bergen | 8/10 | 4612 days | 1% |
| amounstephen | 9/10 | 4613 days | 1% |
| Mike1952 | 8/10 | 4613 days | 1% |
| qofd | 8/10 | 4889 days | 1% |
| Jon_and_Family | 8/10 | 4919 days | 1% |
| Judith | 7/10 | 4936 days | 1% |
| Rene Jakel | 10/10 | 4946 days | 1% |
| Katie Mitchell | 10/10 | 4950 days | 1% |
| Gael Romain | 8/10 | 4950 days | 1% |
| Eva Bock | 8/10 | 4953 days | 1% |
| Daniel Bogdanowitsch | 9/10 | 4969 days | 1% |
| Robert Haidt | 10/10 | 4971 days | 1% |
| dollimyxture | 5/10 | 5009 days | 1% |
| saraswitzer | 9/10 | 5284 days | 1% |
| Bowness | 10/10 | 5302 days | 1% |
| Bert Meuleuorijks | 8/10 | 5311 days | 1% |
| Jenny | 10/10 | 5323 days | 1% |
| Chris Glasg | 7/10 | 5323 days | 1% |
| Dieter Groscurth | 9/10 | 5325 days | 1% |
| M Sicard | 9/10 | 5325 days | 1% |
| A Southwood | 9/10 | 5337 days | 1% |
| Inga | 7/10 | 5341 days | 1% |
| gandj | 9/10 | 5343 days | 1% |
| Susi Schoetzler | 8/10 | 5363 days | 1% |
| Melanie Bielefeld | 10/10 | 5407 days | 1% |
| Kathrin Thomas | 8/10 | 5417 days | 1% |
| Uerilie Stolareh | 10/10 | 5418 days | 1% |
| hellami | 7/10 | 5435 days | 1% |
| Ruth Kinder | 9/10 | 5435 days | 1% |
| DirkGermany | 10/10 | 5644 days | 1% |
| geoffelizabeth | 8/10 | 5649 days | 1% |
| GrahamM1 | 9/10 | 5682 days | 1% |
| Roy | 8/10 | 5690 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 Glentanner Park experience has plenty of reviews and does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
Recent Reviews Adjustment
-2.39% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 75 days. However the Glentanner 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 Glentanner Park experience has been adjusted for 159 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 156 | -2.34% |
| 157 | -2.36% |
| 158 | -2.37% |
| 159 | -2.39% |
| 160 | -2.40% |
| 161 | -2.42% |
| 162 | -2.43% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
2.63% 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
84%
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.