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 Lake Pearson (Moana Rua) Campsite.
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.
79 Valid Reviews
The Lake Pearson (Moana Rua) Campsite experience has a total of 80 reviews. There are 79 valid reviews that are included when calculating the ranking score and 1 invalid review 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 79 valid reviews:
Rating | Count | Percentage | |
---|---|---|---|
10/10 | 21 |
|
27% |
9/10 | 22 |
|
28% |
8/10 | 26 |
|
33% |
7/10 | 5 |
|
6% |
6/10 | 3 |
|
4% |
5/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
2/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
1/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
85.06% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Lake Pearson (Moana Rua) Campsite valid reviews is 85.06% and is based on 79 valid reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here as a comparison to the weighted average.
16 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 79 valid reviews, the experience has 16 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 16 face-to-face reviews:
Rating | Count | Percentage | |
---|---|---|---|
10/10 | 5 |
|
31% |
9/10 | 5 |
|
31% |
8/10 | 4 |
|
25% |
7/10 | 2 |
|
13% |
6/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
5/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
88.13% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Lake Pearson (Moana Rua) Campsite face-to-face reviews is 88.13% and is based on 16 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
86.77%
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 |
---|---|---|---|
Jane | 8/10 | 110 days | 99% |
Bart | 8/10 | 110 days | 99% |
K M | 8/10 | 141 days | 99% |
Stephane | 10/10 | 171 days | 100% |
Tiffndoll | 8/10 | 355 days | 93% |
Jesse Leake | 7/10 | 384 days | 87% |
test | 10/10 | 415 days | 92% |
Marie Perret | 9/10 | 507 days | 86% |
Kelsie | 10/10 | 568 days | 83% |
Jodie Muller | 9/10 | 660 days | 76% |
Campingkea | 8/10 | 690 days | 73% |
MMM | 10/10 | 721 days | 72% |
Laura | 10/10 | 721 days | 72% |
Julia | 7/10 | 780 days | 62% |
Julia | 8/10 | 811 days | 62% |
Alberto | 9/10 | 841 days | 60% |
Amber | 9/10 | 1479 days | 12% |
Sarah | 8/10 | 1541 days | 10% |
JM | 10/10 | 1816 days | 5% |
Stefano | 8/10 | 1845 days | 5% |
Beth Carlton | 8/10 | 1937 days | 5% |
Jae-Marie Edwards | 9/10 | 2151 days | 4% |
Renee | 8/10 | 2151 days | 4% |
Tash & Laura | 8/10 | 2210 days | 4% |
James | 8/10 | 2272 days | 4% |
Tjitze Weststrate | 8/10 | 2272 days | 4% |
Lilia | 2/10 | 2302 days | 2% |
Kiri Edwards | 9/10 | 2394 days | 4% |
Sezz bella | 1/10 | 2486 days | 1% |
Clobby | 6/10 | 2547 days | 3% |
Sanne Heil | 8/10 | 2637 days | 3% |
Pirita Latja | 9/10 | 2667 days | 3% |
Jarod | 10/10 | 2667 days | 3% |
Katy Coutts | 8/10 | 2806 days | 3% |
Lucy Oury | 8/10 | 2868 days | 3% |
Sally Caboche | 10/10 | 2881 days | 3% |
Cathy Mead | 9/10 | 2904 days | 3% |
Fabio Flepp | 10/10 | 2918 days | 3% |
Kelly Roxanne | 7/10 | 2940 days | 3% |
Sue Horstra | 10/10 | 3008 days | 3% |
Marvin Galano | 10/10 | 3093 days | 3% |
Eric Pollard | 9/10 | 3098 days | 2% |
Kate | 9/10 | 3215 days | 2% |
Peter Barker | 10/10 | 3263 days | 2% |
Helena Bond | 9/10 | 3282 days | 2% |
Gabor Kabacs | 9/10 | 3288 days | 2% |
Tony Maroulis | 10/10 | 3294 days | 2% |
Jean marc Daubenfeld | 8/10 | 3333 days | 2% |
Sarah Dial | 10/10 | 3337 days | 2% |
Mike Humphries | 8/10 | 3338 days | 2% |
Avery Wong | 10/10 | 3357 days | 2% |
D'Arcy King | 10/10 | 3401 days | 2% |
James Webster | 8/10 | 3603 days | 1% |
Kurz Werner | 9/10 | 3612 days | 1% |
Vanessa | 10/10 | 3633 days | 1% |
Chris | 10/10 | 3633 days | 1% |
Sebastian Sanne | 9/10 | 3681 days | 1% |
Maggie Tobar | 6/10 | 3687 days | 1% |
Antoine Vernay | 8/10 | 3738 days | 1% |
Gloria Hanke | 7/10 | 3987 days | 1% |
Guido Dust | 7/10 | 3987 days | 1% |
Markus Eckert | 9/10 | 4004 days | 1% |
Sara Williams | 8/10 | 4063 days | 0% |
catherine welsh | 8/10 | 4067 days | 1% |
Jane Stevens | 10/10 | 4067 days | 0% |
Andrea Beck | 9/10 | 4067 days | 0% |
Rebecca Alt | 8/10 | 4070 days | 0% |
Julia Ahrend | 10/10 | 4070 days | 0% |
Jade Fleming | 6/10 | 4128 days | 0% |
Richard Evans | 9/10 | 4159 days | 0% |
Pei | 8/10 | 4312 days | 0% |
Emily Meek | 8/10 | 4342 days | 0% |
Florian | 9/10 | 4342 days | 0% |
Katharina | 8/10 | 4360 days | 0% |
Fabian | 9/10 | 4360 days | 0% |
Judith & John Bishop | 9/10 | 4707 days | 1% |
Michael Long | 9/10 | 5097 days | 1% |
Ann-Kathrin Auditor | 10/10 | 5098 days | 1% |
Lukas Blaauw | 9/10 | 5456 days | 1% |
No Adjustment
Several adjustments to the weighted average may be added to improve relevancy and credibility. Lake Pearson (Moana Rua) Campsite does not meet the criteria for any of these adjustments to apply.
1.50% 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 folk 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.
88%
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.