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 Old Macdonalds Farm and Holiday 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.
![](data:image/svg+xml;utf8,<svg width="300" height="300" viewBox="0 0 300 300" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg"><rect id="bg" width="300" height="300" fill="rgb(46,196,145)" /><path d="m 150 605 Q 206 94 -305 150 Q 206 206 150 -305 Q 94 206 605 150 Q 94 94 150 605 z" fill="rgb(70,136,0)" /><path d="m 150 515 Q 296 4 -215 150 Q 296 296 150 -215 Q 4 296 515 150 Q 4 4 150 515 z" fill="rgb(185,119,255)" /><path d="m 150 176 Q 165 135 124 150 Q 165 165 150 124 Q 135 165 176 150 Q 135 135 150 176 z" fill="rgb(209,59,110)" /></svg>)
Old Macdonalds Farm and Holiday Park
Valid Reviews
126 Valid Reviews
The Old Macdonalds Farm and Holiday Park experience has a total of 128 reviews. There are 126 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 126 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 29 |
|
23% |
| 9/10 | 17 |
|
13% |
| 8/10 | 40 |
|
32% |
| 7/10 | 27 |
|
21% |
| 6/10 | 3 |
|
2% |
| 5/10 | 5 |
|
4% |
| 4/10 | 2 |
|
2% |
| 3/10 | 3 |
|
2% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
80.32% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Old Macdonalds Farm and Holiday Park valid reviews is 80.32% and is based on 126 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
67 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 126 valid reviews, the experience has 67 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 67 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 9 |
|
13% |
| 9/10 | 9 |
|
13% |
| 8/10 | 25 |
|
37% |
| 7/10 | 17 |
|
25% |
| 6/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 5/10 | 3 |
|
4% |
| 4/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 3/10 | 3 |
|
4% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
77.31% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Old Macdonalds Farm and Holiday Park face-to-face reviews is 77.31% and is based on 67 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
95.50%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| MatthiasB | 10/10 | 62 days | 100% |
| Jan | 10/10 | 62 days | 100% |
| Thom S | 10/10 | 93 days | 100% |
| Dora | 10/10 | 93 days | 100% |
| Bea | 10/10 | 154 days | 99% |
| Vanda | 10/10 | 765 days | 67% |
| Tanja & Sven | 9/10 | 1920 days | 5% |
| Colin | 10/10 | 2012 days | 5% |
| justin smith | 10/10 | 2073 days | 4% |
| Kate | 9/10 | 2165 days | 4% |
| Andy and Julia | 10/10 | 2194 days | 4% |
| Ines Rendler | 4/10 | 2226 days | 3% |
| Pedro | 7/10 | 2254 days | 4% |
| Johannes Stahl | 10/10 | 2316 days | 4% |
| Juliane | 7/10 | 2560 days | 3% |
| Simon Springett | 7/10 | 2606 days | 3% |
| Robin Heels | 10/10 | 2612 days | 3% |
| Alyson Reid | 6/10 | 2629 days | 3% |
| Ronald Daigneault | 8/10 | 2674 days | 3% |
| Jun Zhang | 7/10 | 2679 days | 3% |
| Edwin Bos | 8/10 | 2691 days | 3% |
| Nat Geider | 10/10 | 2731 days | 3% |
| Bill | 10/10 | 2741 days | 3% |
| Laureen Trainer | 8/10 | 2879 days | 3% |
| Rian Talen | 7/10 | 2904 days | 3% |
| Artemis | 7/10 | 2925 days | 3% |
| Jack Clise | 9/10 | 2929 days | 3% |
| Mailhos Cécile | 8/10 | 2959 days | 3% |
| Troy Russ | 10/10 | 2983 days | 3% |
| Lisa Erikssen | 8/10 | 2991 days | 3% |
| Martine Baars | 7/10 | 3019 days | 2% |
| Joost de Hond | 10/10 | 3063 days | 3% |
| Joanna du Toit | 9/10 | 3198 days | 2% |
| Iri Campbell | 8/10 | 3282 days | 2% |
| Peter Barker | 10/10 | 3307 days | 2% |
| Staffan Johansson | 6/10 | 3332 days | 2% |
| Leanne Carr | 7/10 | 3332 days | 2% |
| Kevin Johnston | 8/10 | 3349 days | 2% |
| Steve Newton | 8/10 | 3352 days | 2% |
| R Werder | 8/10 | 3365 days | 2% |
| Jean marc Daubenfeld | 8/10 | 3375 days | 2% |
| Matthew Hallowell | 5/10 | 3378 days | 1% |
| CMG | 7/10 | 3655 days | 1% |
| Stephanie Poppe | 8/10 | 3661 days | 1% |
| Andrew Jones | 9/10 | 3686 days | 1% |
| Julia | 8/10 | 3686 days | 1% |
| Jess Rose | 8/10 | 3686 days | 1% |
| Justin Cleverley | 9/10 | 3699 days | 1% |
| Sebastiaan Kemperman | 8/10 | 3700 days | 1% |
| Silke | 10/10 | 3728 days | 1% |
| Aram | 6/10 | 3735 days | 1% |
| Vera Witek | 10/10 | 3764 days | 1% |
| Joanna Doran | 10/10 | 3770 days | 1% |
| Tyler Hofer | 8/10 | 3776 days | 1% |
| Dieter & Lydia Schmees | 7/10 | 3776 days | 1% |
| Pia Sander | 9/10 | 3776 days | 1% |
| Candice Bergon | 8/10 | 3783 days | 1% |
| Sina Leidig | 10/10 | 3806 days | 1% |
| Helma Druyken | 7/10 | 4050 days | 1% |
| Helen King | 8/10 | 4233 days | 0% |
| Team Kim&James | 10/10 | 4295 days | 0% |
| Pierre Cinquin | 8/10 | 4344 days | 0% |
| rickweldon | 10/10 | 4417 days | 1% |
| M Branche | 7/10 | 4419 days | 1% |
| Rouquette | 9/10 | 4427 days | 1% |
| Bjorn Hedmark | 8/10 | 4428 days | 1% |
| Lagunegrand | 7/10 | 4433 days | 1% |
| Dani Wallinger | 9/10 | 4439 days | 1% |
| Bill and Noreen | 7/10 | 4443 days | 1% |
| AnnaM | 9/10 | 4476 days | 1% |
| Inge & Erik | 8/10 | 4792 days | 1% |
| S & J McDonald | 5/10 | 4792 days | 1% |
| Danielle & Jobbe | 7/10 | 4796 days | 1% |
| Uwe Herrdum | 9/10 | 4798 days | 1% |
| Urban Reifler | 3/10 | 4822 days | 0% |
| ZephyrTL | 5/10 | 4842 days | 1% |
| Steve Waterhouse | 3/10 | 5133 days | 0% |
| Norm and Sky | 10/10 | 5136 days | 1% |
| Christian Pflegi | 3/10 | 5136 days | 0% |
| Avry Fabrice | 8/10 | 5136 days | 1% |
| Karin Kueng | 8/10 | 5136 days | 1% |
| Lynn | 4/10 | 5136 days | 1% |
| Jackie MacRostie | 10/10 | 5138 days | 1% |
| Jen Fyfe | 10/10 | 5139 days | 1% |
| Marty Fey | 8/10 | 5139 days | 1% |
| Mary Banks | 8/10 | 5141 days | 1% |
| Miriam | 10/10 | 5141 days | 1% |
| Cheryl & Ged Knight | 7/10 | 5144 days | 1% |
| Jacob Nube | 7/10 | 5144 days | 1% |
| Mirka Tinterova | 10/10 | 5150 days | 1% |
| Andreas Fritesche | 9/10 | 5151 days | 1% |
| Pam & Rob Tellwright | 7/10 | 5152 days | 1% |
| Steve Pearce | 7/10 | 5152 days | 1% |
| Vincent | 8/10 | 5152 days | 1% |
| John Hensman | 7/10 | 5152 days | 1% |
| Jeff Cerjan | 8/10 | 5155 days | 1% |
| Mark Irwin | 7/10 | 5159 days | 1% |
| Andrew Koster | 8/10 | 5161 days | 1% |
| Sarah Pattis | 8/10 | 5163 days | 1% |
| Katharina Dierkes | 8/10 | 5163 days | 1% |
| Jues Lueg | 8/10 | 5163 days | 1% |
| Ruben and Jetske | 8/10 | 5166 days | 1% |
| Marlies Brand | 9/10 | 5167 days | 1% |
| Chris | 8/10 | 5168 days | 1% |
| Daniela Seibel | 9/10 | 5168 days | 1% |
| Trov & Liz Warren | 8/10 | 5168 days | 1% |
| Julia | 8/10 | 5168 days | 1% |
| Roel Wesstra | 5/10 | 5168 days | 1% |
| Heike Toepelt | 9/10 | 5168 days | 1% |
| Seifert | 10/10 | 5168 days | 1% |
| Leslie Aldridge | 7/10 | 5169 days | 1% |
| David | 8/10 | 5176 days | 1% |
| Heike Pless | 10/10 | 5522 days | 1% |
| Jess Mill | 9/10 | 5547 days | 1% |
| Goewe | 8/10 | 5555 days | 1% |
| frederike | 8/10 | 5588 days | 1% |
| rita | 8/10 | 5847 days | 1% |
| Andrew Biddle | 8/10 | 5849 days | 1% |
| Andrew Smith | 7/10 | 5853 days | 1% |
| Hendrik Flier | 8/10 | 5853 days | 1% |
| Jen | 7/10 | 5890 days | 1% |
| Sam | 7/10 | 5890 days | 1% |
| Paul | 5/10 | 5901 days | 1% |
| S | 7/10 | 5901 days | 1% |
| Frances | 9/10 | 5901 days | 1% |
| Katrina | 7/10 | 5932 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 Old Macdonalds Farm and Holiday Park experience has plenty of reviews and does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
Recent Reviews Adjustment
-0.52% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 61 days. However the Old Macdonalds Farm and Holiday 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 Old Macdonalds Farm and Holiday Park experience has been adjusted for 28 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 25 | -0.46% |
| 26 | -0.48% |
| 27 | -0.50% |
| 28 | -0.52% |
| 29 | -0.53% |
| 30 | -0.55% |
| 31 | -0.57% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
0.44% 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
95%
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.