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 Curio Bay Camping Ground.
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.
Curio Bay Camping Ground
Valid Reviews
172 Valid Reviews
The Curio Bay Camping Ground experience has a total of 176 reviews. There are 172 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 172 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 21 |
|
12% |
| 9/10 | 27 |
|
16% |
| 8/10 | 47 |
|
27% |
| 7/10 | 26 |
|
15% |
| 6/10 | 16 |
|
9% |
| 5/10 | 11 |
|
6% |
| 4/10 | 11 |
|
6% |
| 3/10 | 4 |
|
2% |
| 2/10 | 6 |
|
3% |
| 1/10 | 3 |
|
2% |
71.64% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Curio Bay Camping Ground valid reviews is 71.64% and is based on 171 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
76 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 172 valid reviews, the experience has 76 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 76 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 12 |
|
16% |
| 9/10 | 14 |
|
18% |
| 8/10 | 21 |
|
28% |
| 7/10 | 13 |
|
17% |
| 6/10 | 7 |
|
9% |
| 5/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 4/10 | 7 |
|
9% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
76.58% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Curio Bay Camping Ground face-to-face reviews is 76.58% and is based on 76 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
76.44%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mireille & Philippe | 8/10 | 16 days | 98% |
| Daniel | 10/10 | 46 days | 100% |
| Rich | 8/10 | 138 days | 97% |
| Susan Boyton | 10/10 | 230 days | 97% |
| Nick | 8/10 | 291 days | 93% |
| Karien | 8/10 | 319 days | 92% |
| Hannah | 8/10 | 381 days | 90% |
| Beth | 7/10 | 442 days | 83% |
| Lesley | 9/10 | 503 days | 85% |
| Emma | 1/10 | 625 days | 32% |
| Sanja | 6/10 | 685 days | 63% |
| Janet Lewis | 9/10 | 716 days | 70% |
| jo | 8/10 | 747 days | 67% |
| Eilis | 5/10 | 991 days | 34% |
| Laz. | 8/10 | 991 days | 44% |
| Tracy | 1/10 | 1022 days | 17% |
| Bobj | 2/10 | 1050 days | 18% |
| Jolanda Koedood | 10/10 | 1081 days | 37% |
| Sönke | 8/10 | 1081 days | 36% |
| Mel Barnes | 2/10 | 1112 days | 15% |
| RR | 6/10 | 1112 days | 29% |
| Carin | 4/10 | 1142 days | 21% |
| Lothar Valentijn | 9/10 | 1142 days | 31% |
| Ian | 5/10 | 1387 days | 12% |
| Rod K | 8/10 | 1415 days | 14% |
| Davide | 5/10 | 1446 days | 10% |
| Ellie Richards | 5/10 | 1721 days | 4% |
| Dr.A | 10/10 | 1752 days | 5% |
| Char | 10/10 | 1752 days | 5% |
| Andrea Langan | 8/10 | 1811 days | 5% |
| Michelle | 6/10 | 1842 days | 4% |
| Tori | 8/10 | 1842 days | 5% |
| Rich | 8/10 | 1842 days | 5% |
| HSnow | 5/10 | 1964 days | 4% |
| Lauren | 8/10 | 2117 days | 4% |
| Adrian Tyrrell | 4/10 | 2146 days | 3% |
| Linda | 8/10 | 2146 days | 4% |
| Dandietr | 5/10 | 2146 days | 3% |
| Ju | 7/10 | 2146 days | 4% |
| Tom Z. | 7/10 | 2177 days | 4% |
| Leona | 6/10 | 2177 days | 4% |
| Helene & Daniel. | 7/10 | 2177 days | 4% |
| FZ | 8/10 | 2208 days | 4% |
| Bryan S | 4/10 | 2269 days | 3% |
| Ceri | 8/10 | 2542 days | 4% |
| John Netherlands | 9/10 | 2573 days | 3% |
| Cynthia | 8/10 | 2634 days | 3% |
| Melinda Pyke | 9/10 | 2664 days | 3% |
| Clobby | 6/10 | 2848 days | 3% |
| Ralf Koeckler | 5/10 | 2868 days | 2% |
| Karen Forsyth | 7/10 | 2903 days | 3% |
| UK 50-something couple | 2/10 | 2907 days | 1% |
| Millka Pietikainen | 8/10 | 2918 days | 3% |
| Lizzie V | 9/10 | 2938 days | 3% |
| Vanessa Stubbs | 7/10 | 3025 days | 2% |
| Geoff Steele | 8/10 | 3029 days | 3% |
| Ann-Kathrin Schmidt | 8/10 | 3178 days | 2% |
| Walter Neff | 8/10 | 3241 days | 2% |
| Xanthe Bowater | 9/10 | 3266 days | 2% |
| Roeland Driessen | 9/10 | 3272 days | 2% |
| Allan Craig | 3/10 | 3295 days | 1% |
| Shelly Stanchuk | 8/10 | 3333 days | 2% |
| María del Carmen Escandell | 2/10 | 3510 days | 1% |
| Kathy Hart | 5/10 | 3517 days | 1% |
| Susan Boyton | 10/10 | 3555 days | 2% |
| Vanessa Paladin | 2/10 | 3560 days | 1% |
| Idaira González Dorta | 3/10 | 3561 days | 1% |
| Michael Busching | 7/10 | 3566 days | 1% |
| Volker Stroenisch | 3/10 | 3606 days | 1% |
| Louise Alexander | 3/10 | 3638 days | 1% |
| Paul Jones | 10/10 | 3643 days | 1% |
| Max Brunner | 7/10 | 3661 days | 1% |
| Jessie Karsif | 9/10 | 3842 days | 1% |
| Yanick Desautels | 9/10 | 3873 days | 1% |
| svenja spiegel | 7/10 | 3910 days | 1% |
| Clement Oudjaovok | 8/10 | 3931 days | 1% |
| Mike Gornall | 6/10 | 3944 days | 1% |
| Daniel Alengnick | 7/10 | 4018 days | 1% |
| Clare Lambley | 8/10 | 4019 days | 1% |
| Eric Lambley | 8/10 | 4020 days | 1% |
| Daniel Goellner | 7/10 | 4049 days | 1% |
| Gianpiero Rodari | 7/10 | 4064 days | 1% |
| Andrea | 7/10 | 4095 days | 0% |
| travelscot | 4/10 | 4248 days | 0% |
| mcp hm | 6/10 | 4278 days | 0% |
| Tina Hilbich | 10/10 | 4291 days | 0% |
| Simeon W | 10/10 | 4291 days | 0% |
| Eva-Maria Krueger | 8/10 | 4309 days | 0% |
| Kathrin Deichmann | 10/10 | 4314 days | 0% |
| Juliane | 9/10 | 4321 days | 0% |
| Kristyna | 9/10 | 4325 days | 0% |
| Derek Knight | 10/10 | 4351 days | 0% |
| Jacqui Knight | 9/10 | 4351 days | 0% |
| Stuart Wilson | 7/10 | 4364 days | 0% |
| Marine | 9/10 | 4365 days | 0% |
| Anke D. | 7/10 | 4368 days | 0% |
| Paul Wood | 8/10 | 4399 days | 1% |
| Bob Ash | 1/10 | 4399 days | 0% |
| Pokari | 7/10 | 4460 days | 1% |
| Helen King | 8/10 | 4490 days | 1% |
| Maria Klister | 9/10 | 4658 days | 1% |
| Lea Roser | 10/10 | 4660 days | 1% |
| Tanja Schlagermann | 10/10 | 4676 days | 1% |
| Engelstatter | 4/10 | 4677 days | 1% |
| Renate | 4/10 | 4677 days | 1% |
| Francois Marchar | 7/10 | 4684 days | 1% |
| Enna Keet | 8/10 | 4686 days | 1% |
| Wendy Ward | 6/10 | 4690 days | 1% |
| Phil & Laura | 9/10 | 4702 days | 1% |
| Hanneke P | 5/10 | 4733 days | 1% |
| Mark and Eefie | 7/10 | 4749 days | 1% |
| Frans Derks | 9/10 | 4757 days | 1% |
| Katharina Pape | 9/10 | 4762 days | 1% |
| Craig Jones | 8/10 | 4764 days | 1% |
| Loesje | 10/10 | 4764 days | 1% |
| Marjo Cousijn | 6/10 | 4781 days | 1% |
| Olivia Reiter | 10/10 | 5032 days | 1% |
| Alan Brady | 2/10 | 5036 days | 0% |
| Fritschi | 5/10 | 5041 days | 1% |
| Marcel & Kim Meichtry | 8/10 | 5045 days | 1% |
| Karin Laurev | 4/10 | 5048 days | 1% |
| S & J McDonald | 4/10 | 5049 days | 1% |
| Rebecca Doehl | 8/10 | 5052 days | 1% |
| Russell | 4/10 | 5053 days | 1% |
| Rikke & Trine Bundgaard | 10/10 | 5053 days | 1% |
| Manuela Weber | 6/10 | 5053 days | 1% |
| Mirando4ka | 10/10 | 5068 days | 1% |
| Boule_de_gomme | 9/10 | 5068 days | 1% |
| Monika & Roger | 9/10 | 5081 days | 1% |
| polzeath | 6/10 | 5099 days | 1% |
| Nathanael Boehm | 5/10 | 5130 days | 1% |
| Res Kormann | 7/10 | 5363 days | 1% |
| Rachel | 8/10 | 5377 days | 1% |
| Todd Pang | 9/10 | 5389 days | 1% |
| Robin Smith | 6/10 | 5391 days | 1% |
| Jacob | 8/10 | 5392 days | 1% |
| Richard Gallichan | 6/10 | 5392 days | 1% |
| Oppenoorth | 9/10 | 5393 days | 1% |
| Amanda Wells | 10/10 | 5399 days | 1% |
| Andrea Fuchs | 7/10 | 5399 days | 1% |
| Natthien Le Gall | 6/10 | 5406 days | 1% |
| Nicolas | 8/10 | 5406 days | 1% |
| Manfred Liuduer | 8/10 | 5409 days | 1% |
| Caroline Sheridan | 8/10 | 5409 days | 1% |
| Hartmut Tonner | 8/10 | 5411 days | 1% |
| Gerd Pagel | 10/10 | 5418 days | 1% |
| Andy Martin | 9/10 | 5422 days | 1% |
| Mark Aarts | 7/10 | 5424 days | 1% |
| Chris | 7/10 | 5425 days | 1% |
| Pam de Vos | 4/10 | 5429 days | 1% |
| Brandt | 8/10 | 5430 days | 1% |
| Jill | 9/10 | 5525 days | 1% |
| Sveninse Johansson | 10/10 | 5708 days | 1% |
| Stephen M | 8/10 | 5751 days | 1% |
| markus Brandenberger | 6/10 | 5757 days | 1% |
| Einar | 8/10 | 5758 days | 1% |
| Inbar Yizhar Barnea | 8/10 | 5758 days | 1% |
| Lis & Rob Tate | 8/10 | 5760 days | 1% |
| Bert Meuleuorijks | 7/10 | 5766 days | 1% |
| johnandgin | 4/10 | 5770 days | 1% |
| Bob Kusesia | 8/10 | 5771 days | 1% |
| Kerry Wood | 10/10 | 5772 days | 1% |
| Carl Diehl | 9/10 | 5796 days | 1% |
| Jonathan Angela | 8/10 | 5812 days | 1% |
| kay and colin | 8/10 | 5829 days | 1% |
| hellami | 6/10 | 5890 days | 1% |
| bogaard | 8/10 | 5986 days | 1% |
| jjakkeren | 7/10 | 6104 days | 1% |
| Christian Moll | 7/10 | 6120 days | 1% |
| Richard | 7/10 | 6145 days | 1% |
| Anton | 9/10 | 6151 days | 1% |
| Rob | 9/10 | 6153 days | 1% |
Adjustments
No Adjustment
Several adjustments to the weighted average may be added to improve relevancy and credibility. Curio Bay Camping Ground does not meet the criteria for any of these adjustments to apply.
Balancing Adjustment
4.39% 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
80%
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.