Kia ora, 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
83.74%
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 | 301 days | 100% |
| Vantrolls | 7/10 | 332 days | 92% |
| Monika | 10/10 | 332 days | 99% |
| Janet Lewis | 9/10 | 392 days | 95% |
| Marie Perret | 8/10 | 484 days | 90% |
| Dillon | 8/10 | 545 days | 86% |
| Dillon | 8/10 | 545 days | 86% |
| 小B | 5/10 | 667 days | 60% |
| Reiner Elze | 5/10 | 667 days | 60% |
| Esther | 10/10 | 726 days | 74% |
| Trui Waalwijk | 10/10 | 726 days | 74% |
| Jaycee | 8/10 | 757 days | 70% |
| Sophie Rellensmann | 6/10 | 757 days | 61% |
| Olivia | 10/10 | 757 days | 71% |
| RR | 9/10 | 788 days | 67% |
| Strider | 8/10 | 788 days | 67% |
| Yuvin | 10/10 | 879 days | 59% |
| Team Wright | 9/10 | 1032 days | 43% |
| Lisa | 9/10 | 1214 days | 27% |
| Graham | 9/10 | 1518 days | 11% |
| Rach | 7/10 | 1548 days | 9% |
| Dulan | 8/10 | 1640 days | 7% |
| Carla | 10/10 | 1822 days | 5% |
| Ellie | 10/10 | 1822 days | 5% |
| Courtney | 9/10 | 1822 days | 5% |
| Erica | 8/10 | 1853 days | 5% |
| Tom Z. | 10/10 | 1853 days | 5% |
| Lola | 9/10 | 1914 days | 5% |
| Arnout | 7/10 | 1945 days | 5% |
| Camper | 2/10 | 2067 days | 2% |
| Ranjit | 8/10 | 2128 days | 5% |
| Maggie | 8/10 | 2128 days | 5% |
| Kosala Perera | 8/10 | 2187 days | 4% |
| Kimberly Boyle | 9/10 | 2187 days | 4% |
| Zoe | 8/10 | 2218 days | 4% |
| Kevin O'Brien | 7/10 | 2218 days | 4% |
| Ian | 9/10 | 2279 days | 4% |
| Robert | 7/10 | 2310 days | 4% |
| Shira LA | 2/10 | 2552 days | 2% |
| Leong Mee Yee | 5/10 | 2556 days | 2% |
| Alecsandra Ghita | 6/10 | 2590 days | 3% |
| Audrey Wong | 5/10 | 2591 days | 3% |
| Tay Dao Han | 10/10 | 2599 days | 4% |
| Katie Jansen | 2/10 | 2689 days | 2% |
| Vanessa Stubbs | 7/10 | 2701 days | 3% |
| Jill Sharpe | 1/10 | 2839 days | 1% |
| Victoria Strong | 7/10 | 2946 days | 3% |
| Martin Taylor | 10/10 | 2947 days | 3% |
| Alan Brown | 8/10 | 2947 days | 3% |
| Jane Powell | 2/10 | 2970 days | 1% |
| Darren Bolton | 4/10 | 2987 days | 2% |
| Zipora Risakotta | 7/10 | 3032 days | 3% |
| Donguk Chung | 10/10 | 3140 days | 3% |
| Al Hindley | 8/10 | 3252 days | 2% |
| Lay Tyng Chan | 7/10 | 3290 days | 2% |
| hendrik king | 8/10 | 3344 days | 2% |
| Sarah Gurney | 8/10 | 3365 days | 2% |
| Amy Steiger | 8/10 | 3466 days | 2% |
| Georgia Posar | 10/10 | 3535 days | 2% |
| Yvonne Wu | 8/10 | 3558 days | 2% |
| Wolfgang Rank | 8/10 | 3588 days | 2% |
| Andrew Cruickshank | 9/10 | 3619 days | 2% |
| Averil Brown | 8/10 | 3645 days | 1% |
| Robert Warner | 7/10 | 3647 days | 1% |
| misstassie | 8/10 | 3678 days | 1% |
| Fabian Rodriguez | 6/10 | 3893 days | 1% |
| Michelle K | 2/10 | 3924 days | 0% |
| Ara Moore-Tuwhangai | 8/10 | 3924 days | 1% |
| Brita Topp | 8/10 | 3985 days | 1% |
| Nicholas Ng | 3/10 | 4075 days | 0% |
| Cuz da Maori | 8/10 | 4075 days | 1% |
| griff griffiths | 10/10 | 4075 days | 1% |
| Mary | 4/10 | 4350 days | 0% |
| Cmi | 9/10 | 4409 days | 1% |
| David | 10/10 | 4470 days | 1% |
| sueadegizmo | 8/10 | 4623 days | 1% |
| elaineandbob | 5/10 | 4684 days | 1% |
| nicky2284 | 10/10 | 4684 days | 1% |
| Matthias Angela | 6/10 | 4709 days | 1% |
| Def Fem | 8/10 | 4710 days | 1% |
| Rick Moth | 7/10 | 4724 days | 1% |
| Dieter Mangold | 4/10 | 4727 days | 0% |
| John Hughes | 8/10 | 4736 days | 1% |
| Ursi Meier | 8/10 | 4738 days | 1% |
| Jessica Lane | 2/10 | 4741 days | 0% |
| Nicole van Bergen | 8/10 | 4743 days | 1% |
| amounstephen | 9/10 | 4744 days | 1% |
| Mike1952 | 8/10 | 4744 days | 1% |
| qofd | 8/10 | 5020 days | 1% |
| Jon_and_Family | 8/10 | 5050 days | 1% |
| Judith | 7/10 | 5067 days | 1% |
| Rene Jakel | 10/10 | 5077 days | 1% |
| Katie Mitchell | 10/10 | 5081 days | 1% |
| Gael Romain | 8/10 | 5081 days | 1% |
| Eva Bock | 8/10 | 5084 days | 1% |
| Daniel Bogdanowitsch | 9/10 | 5100 days | 1% |
| Robert Haidt | 10/10 | 5102 days | 1% |
| dollimyxture | 5/10 | 5140 days | 1% |
| saraswitzer | 9/10 | 5415 days | 1% |
| Bowness | 10/10 | 5433 days | 1% |
| Bert Meuleuorijks | 8/10 | 5442 days | 1% |
| Jenny | 10/10 | 5454 days | 1% |
| Chris Glasg | 7/10 | 5454 days | 1% |
| Dieter Groscurth | 9/10 | 5456 days | 1% |
| M Sicard | 9/10 | 5456 days | 1% |
| A Southwood | 9/10 | 5468 days | 1% |
| Inga | 7/10 | 5472 days | 1% |
| gandj | 9/10 | 5474 days | 1% |
| Susi Schoetzler | 8/10 | 5494 days | 1% |
| Melanie Bielefeld | 10/10 | 5538 days | 1% |
| Kathrin Thomas | 8/10 | 5548 days | 1% |
| Uerilie Stolareh | 10/10 | 5549 days | 1% |
| hellami | 7/10 | 5566 days | 1% |
| Ruth Kinder | 9/10 | 5566 days | 1% |
| DirkGermany | 10/10 | 5775 days | 1% |
| geoffelizabeth | 8/10 | 5780 days | 1% |
| GrahamM1 | 9/10 | 5813 days | 1% |
| Roy | 8/10 | 5821 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
-4.13% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 48 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 200 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 197 | -4.07% |
| 198 | -4.09% |
| 199 | -4.11% |
| 200 | -4.13% |
| 201 | -4.15% |
| 202 | -4.17% |
| 203 | -4.19% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
3.11% 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
83%
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.