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 Hanmer Field Base and Picnic Area.
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.
Hanmer Field Base and Picnic Area
Valid Reviews
87 Valid Reviews
The Hanmer Field Base and Picnic Area experience has a total of 94 reviews. There are 87 valid reviews that are included when calculating the ranking score and 7 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 87 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 18 |
|
21% |
| 9/10 | 26 |
|
30% |
| 8/10 | 27 |
|
31% |
| 7/10 | 9 |
|
10% |
| 6/10 | 3 |
|
3% |
| 5/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 3 |
|
3% |
82.64% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Hanmer Field Base and Picnic Area valid reviews is 82.64% and is based on 87 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
5 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 87 valid reviews, the experience has 5 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 5 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 9/10 | 2 |
|
40% |
| 8/10 | 1 |
|
20% |
| 7/10 | 1 |
|
20% |
| 6/10 | 1 |
|
20% |
| 5/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
78.00% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Hanmer Field Base and Picnic Area face-to-face reviews is 78.00% and is based on 5 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
86.54%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mike Fricker | 10/10 | 141 days | 100% |
| Tara | 9/10 | 171 days | 98% |
| @follow.tim.warren | 9/10 | 171 days | 98% |
| Deb | 10/10 | 171 days | 99% |
| L&M | 10/10 | 202 days | 99% |
| Julian | 7/10 | 231 days | 91% |
| Carolyn | 8/10 | 293 days | 94% |
| Victoria | 7/10 | 354 days | 87% |
| Marie Perret | 8/10 | 384 days | 91% |
| Michelle & Rob | 7/10 | 446 days | 83% |
| Matt H | 9/10 | 446 days | 89% |
| DBennie | 9/10 | 507 days | 85% |
| Ty | 10/10 | 537 days | 84% |
| Joe | 9/10 | 568 days | 82% |
| Tom | 8/10 | 596 days | 79% |
| Stacey & Mike | 7/10 | 627 days | 73% |
| Corrine | 10/10 | 688 days | 74% |
| Evan | 7/10 | 688 days | 69% |
| Heidi Maurice | 8/10 | 688 days | 72% |
| Rebecca Woodbridge | 8/10 | 688 days | 72% |
| Georgia | 9/10 | 749 days | 68% |
| Lucy | 10/10 | 780 days | 66% |
| Mike&Fe | 10/10 | 961 days | 48% |
| Jack | 10/10 | 1298 days | 21% |
| Henrique | 9/10 | 1357 days | 17% |
| Rey | 8/10 | 1388 days | 16% |
| Shalamar | 10/10 | 1388 days | 16% |
| Neal McCarthy | 9/10 | 1418 days | 14% |
| Josephine | 6/10 | 1449 days | 11% |
| Helen | 9/10 | 1479 days | 12% |
| Claire ALLMON | 9/10 | 1479 days | 12% |
| Doug | 8/10 | 1541 days | 9% |
| Tim | 10/10 | 1663 days | 6% |
| Stefan Hohmann | 8/10 | 1692 days | 6% |
| Daria | 10/10 | 1692 days | 6% |
| Lua | 10/10 | 1754 days | 5% |
| Jayme | 8/10 | 1784 days | 5% |
| Ambs | 10/10 | 1815 days | 5% |
| Ana | 8/10 | 1815 days | 5% |
| Jordie | 8/10 | 1845 days | 5% |
| Cass | 9/10 | 1845 days | 5% |
| Tarsha | 8/10 | 1876 days | 5% |
| Becca | 9/10 | 1937 days | 5% |
| Anastasia | 10/10 | 1937 days | 5% |
| Kristal | 10/10 | 1968 days | 5% |
| Deb | 8/10 | 2088 days | 4% |
| B.R. | 7/10 | 2088 days | 4% |
| Ymke Huisman | 6/10 | 2119 days | 4% |
| Ben | 8/10 | 2119 days | 4% |
| Sophie Skinner | 9/10 | 2149 days | 4% |
| Noreasters | 1/10 | 2149 days | 2% |
| Mike Fricker | 9/10 | 2180 days | 4% |
| Lance | 9/10 | 2180 days | 4% |
| Jenna webber | 8/10 | 2210 days | 4% |
| Brittany Jackson | 8/10 | 2241 days | 4% |
| Christina | 8/10 | 2333 days | 4% |
| Michelle D | 9/10 | 2333 days | 4% |
| Carl Fogarty | 9/10 | 2363 days | 4% |
| Simon Springett | 8/10 | 2408 days | 4% |
| Luis Vigil Vidal | 9/10 | 2436 days | 2% |
| Patrick Currier | 8/10 | 2450 days | 3% |
| Rogier Kavelaars | 8/10 | 2500 days | 3% |
| Vander Plancke Julien | 8/10 | 2506 days | 3% |
| Jasmine Andrew | 9/10 | 2529 days | 3% |
| Katherine Ong | 10/10 | 2535 days | 3% |
| Jo Dawson | 7/10 | 2657 days | 3% |
| Henry | 10/10 | 2657 days | 3% |
| Beverley Halfhide | 5/10 | 2701 days | 2% |
| Ann Le | 9/10 | 2710 days | 3% |
| Les Tregier | 10/10 | 2725 days | 3% |
| Craig Wilcock | 8/10 | 2733 days | 3% |
| Tim Statler | 9/10 | 2778 days | 3% |
| Walter Neff | 1/10 | 2787 days | 1% |
| Catherine Johnston | 8/10 | 2951 days | 2% |
| Matt Hughes | 9/10 | 3093 days | 2% |
| Sam Smith-Palomeque | 9/10 | 3110 days | 2% |
| Sean Stevens | 8/10 | 3125 days | 2% |
| Zdenda Barvinek | 9/10 | 3176 days | 2% |
| Dieter Schmees | 6/10 | 3561 days | 0% |
| Moudry Vojtech | 8/10 | 3595 days | 1% |
| Sina Leidig | 1/10 | 3610 days | 0% |
| Kathy Hart | 9/10 | 3794 days | 1% |
| Nadia R | 8/10 | 3824 days | 1% |
| John Treasure | 7/10 | 3883 days | 1% |
| Kirbyfamily | 8/10 | 4189 days | 0% |
| Bev Stott | 7/10 | 4226 days | 0% |
| Daniel Jezak | 9/10 | 4230 days | 0% |
Adjustments
No Adjustment
Several adjustments to the weighted average may be added to improve relevancy and credibility. Hanmer Field Base and Picnic Area does not meet the criteria for any of these adjustments to apply.
Balancing Adjustment
1.54% 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
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.