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 Spa 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.
Spa Park
Valid Reviews
89 Valid Reviews
The Spa Park experience has a total of 90 reviews. There are 89 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 89 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 36 |
|
40% |
| 9/10 | 26 |
|
29% |
| 8/10 | 16 |
|
18% |
| 7/10 | 10 |
|
11% |
| 6/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 5/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 4/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
89.44% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Spa Park valid reviews is 89.44% and is based on 89 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
81 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 89 valid reviews, the experience has 81 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 81 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 34 |
|
42% |
| 9/10 | 23 |
|
28% |
| 8/10 | 15 |
|
19% |
| 7/10 | 8 |
|
10% |
| 6/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 5/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 4/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
89.75% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Spa Park face-to-face reviews is 89.75% and is based on 81 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
93.41%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Léo | 10/10 | 659 days | 100% |
| C J B | 10/10 | 2393 days | 5% |
| Felix Koehler | 10/10 | 2898 days | 4% |
| Lucie Revay | 7/10 | 2920 days | 3% |
| Simon Schatz | 10/10 | 3190 days | 3% |
| Nadja Guiliani | 7/10 | 3195 days | 3% |
| Jamie Serieux | 8/10 | 3198 days | 3% |
| Philipp | 7/10 | 3204 days | 3% |
| George Bellwood | 9/10 | 3206 days | 3% |
| Sarah Dorsett | 8/10 | 3206 days | 3% |
| Lewis Cole | 8/10 | 3208 days | 3% |
| Robert Klub | 10/10 | 3227 days | 3% |
| Johannes Koch | 10/10 | 3229 days | 3% |
| Clara Loizeil | 7/10 | 3235 days | 3% |
| Patrick Veber | 8/10 | 3235 days | 3% |
| Fabian | 4/10 | 3239 days | 2% |
| Maartje | 9/10 | 3240 days | 3% |
| Anders Hauke | 9/10 | 3241 days | 3% |
| Alex Reeve | 10/10 | 3248 days | 3% |
| Eric Hertort | 10/10 | 3252 days | 3% |
| Christian Meyer | 10/10 | 3252 days | 3% |
| Melissa Fuster | 8/10 | 3256 days | 3% |
| Mikkel Palleson | 10/10 | 3256 days | 3% |
| Marek Dvonsky | 8/10 | 3257 days | 3% |
| Sam | 8/10 | 3263 days | 3% |
| Gregor | 10/10 | 3268 days | 3% |
| Shany Maydan | 10/10 | 3294 days | 3% |
| Sebastian and Susanna | 9/10 | 3301 days | 3% |
| Jade Cownley | 9/10 | 3594 days | 2% |
| Pierre Planchez | 9/10 | 3613 days | 2% |
| Erik Hafuer | 9/10 | 3649 days | 2% |
| Polly Rider | 9/10 | 3675 days | 2% |
| Lea Darotchetche | 8/10 | 3836 days | 1% |
| Julia Schabenberger | 9/10 | 3914 days | 1% |
| Lola | 10/10 | 3914 days | 1% |
| Alisa | 9/10 | 3914 days | 1% |
| Laura | 10/10 | 3914 days | 1% |
| Cecilia Anderson | 9/10 | 3917 days | 1% |
| Mattias | 8/10 | 3917 days | 1% |
| Guillaume Yedoux | 8/10 | 3917 days | 1% |
| Zuzana Holubova | 8/10 | 3917 days | 1% |
| Jenny Finch | 9/10 | 3942 days | 1% |
| Agathe Dupuis | 10/10 | 3943 days | 1% |
| Florent Bouillon | 8/10 | 3943 days | 1% |
| Stephen Revah | 9/10 | 3943 days | 1% |
| Hadler | 7/10 | 3947 days | 1% |
| Callum | 9/10 | 3958 days | 1% |
| Max Meternich | 10/10 | 3960 days | 1% |
| Philip Donachie | 9/10 | 3962 days | 1% |
| Andreas Jung | 10/10 | 3970 days | 1% |
| Jesseca Klausch | 10/10 | 3972 days | 1% |
| Vincent Schaeflier | 9/10 | 3972 days | 1% |
| Victor Herranz | 10/10 | 3977 days | 1% |
| Nimh Oudhof | 10/10 | 3978 days | 1% |
| Luca Willensrock | 9/10 | 3990 days | 1% |
| Arnaud Memay | 7/10 | 3998 days | 1% |
| Julia Ahrend | 10/10 | 4008 days | 1% |
| Molly Ladd | 8/10 | 4307 days | 0% |
| Missy and Chaz | 10/10 | 4321 days | 0% |
| Pink | 8/10 | 4344 days | 0% |
| Johannes Mullner | 10/10 | 4666 days | 1% |
| Jessica Marling | 10/10 | 4666 days | 1% |
| Camille and Lucie | 9/10 | 4667 days | 1% |
| Jaroslav Gajdos | 10/10 | 4679 days | 1% |
| Carl & Desiree Potter | 9/10 | 4688 days | 1% |
| Yves & Sylvia | 7/10 | 4690 days | 1% |
| Andy Bridgman | 8/10 | 4690 days | 1% |
| Maximilian Heller | 9/10 | 4697 days | 1% |
| Luis Valenzuela | 7/10 | 4698 days | 1% |
| FamilyGuy | 9/10 | 4736 days | 1% |
| Clement_Weather | 7/10 | 4736 days | 1% |
| N smith | 9/10 | 4736 days | 1% |
| Annie | 10/10 | 4767 days | 1% |
| Petra | 10/10 | 5005 days | 1% |
| Gema | 9/10 | 5025 days | 1% |
| Aimee Pollett | 7/10 | 5032 days | 1% |
| Vanessa Hanzen | 10/10 | 5034 days | 1% |
| Rissa W | 9/10 | 5042 days | 1% |
| Natthien Le Gall | 8/10 | 5043 days | 1% |
| Rebecca Stones | 10/10 | 5044 days | 1% |
| Matthijs Muijsers | 9/10 | 5063 days | 1% |
| hooperuk | 10/10 | 5376 days | 1% |
| John N | 10/10 | 5401 days | 1% |
| Blair Malcolm | 10/10 | 5416 days | 1% |
| Hailey & Fin | 10/10 | 5447 days | 1% |
| varenaee | 9/10 | 5482 days | 1% |
| Pieter Neeleman | 10/10 | 5509 days | 1% |
| WiebkeS | 10/10 | 5757 days | 1% |
| Lars Haf | 10/10 | 5759 days | 1% |
Adjustments
No Adjustment
Several adjustments to the weighted average may be added to improve relevancy and credibility. Spa Park does not meet the criteria for any of these adjustments to apply.
Balancing Adjustment
0.59% 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.
Final Ranking Score
94%
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.