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
93.40%
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 | 629 days | 100% |
| C J B | 10/10 | 2362 days | 5% |
| Felix Koehler | 10/10 | 2868 days | 4% |
| Lucie Revay | 7/10 | 2890 days | 3% |
| Simon Schatz | 10/10 | 3160 days | 3% |
| Nadja Guiliani | 7/10 | 3165 days | 3% |
| Jamie Serieux | 8/10 | 3168 days | 3% |
| Philipp | 7/10 | 3174 days | 3% |
| George Bellwood | 9/10 | 3176 days | 3% |
| Sarah Dorsett | 8/10 | 3176 days | 3% |
| Lewis Cole | 8/10 | 3178 days | 3% |
| Robert Klub | 10/10 | 3197 days | 3% |
| Johannes Koch | 10/10 | 3199 days | 3% |
| Clara Loizeil | 7/10 | 3205 days | 3% |
| Patrick Veber | 8/10 | 3205 days | 3% |
| Fabian | 4/10 | 3209 days | 2% |
| Maartje | 9/10 | 3210 days | 3% |
| Anders Hauke | 9/10 | 3211 days | 3% |
| Alex Reeve | 10/10 | 3218 days | 3% |
| Eric Hertort | 10/10 | 3222 days | 3% |
| Christian Meyer | 10/10 | 3222 days | 3% |
| Melissa Fuster | 8/10 | 3226 days | 3% |
| Mikkel Palleson | 10/10 | 3226 days | 3% |
| Marek Dvonsky | 8/10 | 3227 days | 3% |
| Sam | 8/10 | 3233 days | 3% |
| Gregor | 10/10 | 3238 days | 3% |
| Shany Maydan | 10/10 | 3264 days | 3% |
| Sebastian and Susanna | 9/10 | 3271 days | 3% |
| Jade Cownley | 9/10 | 3564 days | 2% |
| Pierre Planchez | 9/10 | 3583 days | 2% |
| Erik Hafuer | 9/10 | 3619 days | 2% |
| Polly Rider | 9/10 | 3645 days | 2% |
| Lea Darotchetche | 8/10 | 3805 days | 1% |
| Julia Schabenberger | 9/10 | 3884 days | 1% |
| Lola | 10/10 | 3884 days | 1% |
| Alisa | 9/10 | 3884 days | 1% |
| Laura | 10/10 | 3884 days | 1% |
| Cecilia Anderson | 9/10 | 3887 days | 1% |
| Mattias | 8/10 | 3887 days | 1% |
| Guillaume Yedoux | 8/10 | 3887 days | 1% |
| Zuzana Holubova | 8/10 | 3887 days | 1% |
| Jenny Finch | 9/10 | 3912 days | 1% |
| Agathe Dupuis | 10/10 | 3913 days | 1% |
| Florent Bouillon | 8/10 | 3913 days | 1% |
| Stephen Revah | 9/10 | 3913 days | 1% |
| Hadler | 7/10 | 3917 days | 1% |
| Callum | 9/10 | 3928 days | 1% |
| Max Meternich | 10/10 | 3930 days | 1% |
| Philip Donachie | 9/10 | 3932 days | 1% |
| Andreas Jung | 10/10 | 3940 days | 1% |
| Jesseca Klausch | 10/10 | 3942 days | 1% |
| Vincent Schaeflier | 9/10 | 3942 days | 1% |
| Victor Herranz | 10/10 | 3947 days | 1% |
| Nimh Oudhof | 10/10 | 3948 days | 1% |
| Luca Willensrock | 9/10 | 3960 days | 1% |
| Arnaud Memay | 7/10 | 3968 days | 1% |
| Julia Ahrend | 10/10 | 3978 days | 1% |
| Molly Ladd | 8/10 | 4277 days | 0% |
| Missy and Chaz | 10/10 | 4291 days | 0% |
| Pink | 8/10 | 4314 days | 0% |
| Johannes Mullner | 10/10 | 4636 days | 1% |
| Jessica Marling | 10/10 | 4636 days | 1% |
| Camille and Lucie | 9/10 | 4637 days | 1% |
| Jaroslav Gajdos | 10/10 | 4649 days | 1% |
| Carl & Desiree Potter | 9/10 | 4658 days | 1% |
| Yves & Sylvia | 7/10 | 4660 days | 1% |
| Andy Bridgman | 8/10 | 4660 days | 1% |
| Maximilian Heller | 9/10 | 4667 days | 1% |
| Luis Valenzuela | 7/10 | 4668 days | 1% |
| FamilyGuy | 9/10 | 4706 days | 1% |
| Clement_Weather | 7/10 | 4706 days | 1% |
| N smith | 9/10 | 4706 days | 1% |
| Annie | 10/10 | 4737 days | 1% |
| Petra | 10/10 | 4974 days | 1% |
| Gema | 9/10 | 4995 days | 1% |
| Aimee Pollett | 7/10 | 5002 days | 1% |
| Vanessa Hanzen | 10/10 | 5004 days | 1% |
| Rissa W | 9/10 | 5012 days | 1% |
| Natthien Le Gall | 8/10 | 5013 days | 1% |
| Rebecca Stones | 10/10 | 5014 days | 1% |
| Matthijs Muijsers | 9/10 | 5033 days | 1% |
| hooperuk | 10/10 | 5346 days | 1% |
| John N | 10/10 | 5371 days | 1% |
| Blair Malcolm | 10/10 | 5386 days | 1% |
| Hailey & Fin | 10/10 | 5417 days | 1% |
| varenaee | 9/10 | 5452 days | 1% |
| Pieter Neeleman | 10/10 | 5479 days | 1% |
| WiebkeS | 10/10 | 5727 days | 1% |
| Lars Haf | 10/10 | 5729 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.