G'day, 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 Picton Tasman Holiday Parks.
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.
Picton Tasman Holiday Parks
Valid Reviews
139 Valid Reviews
The Picton Tasman Holiday Parks experience has a total of 140 reviews. There are 139 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 139 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 33 |
|
24% |
| 9/10 | 41 |
|
29% |
| 8/10 | 44 |
|
32% |
| 7/10 | 14 |
|
10% |
| 6/10 | 3 |
|
2% |
| 5/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 4/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 1/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
84.82% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Picton Tasman Holiday Parks valid reviews is 84.82% and is based on 139 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
101 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 139 valid reviews, the experience has 101 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 101 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 23 |
|
23% |
| 9/10 | 30 |
|
30% |
| 8/10 | 33 |
|
33% |
| 7/10 | 12 |
|
12% |
| 6/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 5/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 4/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
85.05% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Picton Tasman Holiday Parks face-to-face reviews is 85.05% and is based on 101 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
90.25%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rich | 9/10 | 189 days | 100% |
| Jason C | 10/10 | 251 days | 99% |
| Donna | 10/10 | 251 days | 99% |
| Aoife | 8/10 | 433 days | 90% |
| Laura | 9/10 | 1013 days | 43% |
| Ferg | 10/10 | 1013 days | 44% |
| Inge | 8/10 | 1072 days | 38% |
| Cindi Wight | 9/10 | 1133 days | 33% |
| Sarah | 8/10 | 1164 days | 30% |
| Alexis | 10/10 | 2015 days | 5% |
| Cody | 10/10 | 2108 days | 5% |
| Mike Smith | 7/10 | 2168 days | 4% |
| Beth Carlton | 1/10 | 2229 days | 2% |
| Christian | 10/10 | 2502 days | 4% |
| Emma | 9/10 | 2533 days | 4% |
| Demi Thompson | 6/10 | 2594 days | 3% |
| Brett See | 9/10 | 2625 days | 3% |
| Mike Fricker | 9/10 | 2625 days | 3% |
| Urs Bruderer | 10/10 | 3313 days | 2% |
| Leslie Lindeman | 10/10 | 3524 days | 2% |
| Ray Tombs | 9/10 | 3527 days | 2% |
| Phillippa McLernon | 8/10 | 3586 days | 2% |
| Tine Fook | 6/10 | 3622 days | 1% |
| Jan Towers | 8/10 | 4267 days | 0% |
| Brita Topp | 8/10 | 4269 days | 0% |
| Mike Fricker | 8/10 | 4269 days | 0% |
| Mark Towers | 8/10 | 4300 days | 0% |
| Rikke Petersen | 9/10 | 4318 days | 0% |
| Ted Cole | 8/10 | 4328 days | 0% |
| Nigel | 8/10 | 4335 days | 0% |
| catherine welsh | 8/10 | 4359 days | 0% |
| Nigel & Annie Dale | 8/10 | 4420 days | 1% |
| ozelmer | 6/10 | 4480 days | 1% |
| AusCampa | 9/10 | 4603 days | 1% |
| Mark Wiggington | 7/10 | 4628 days | 1% |
| Ken Milligan | 8/10 | 4652 days | 1% |
| Gale Willcocks | 10/10 | 4658 days | 1% |
| Ken Richardson | 8/10 | 4658 days | 1% |
| Heather Macdonald | 9/10 | 4693 days | 1% |
| Nadine | 9/10 | 4737 days | 1% |
| Robert Staeller | 8/10 | 4740 days | 1% |
| David and Sally Wallis | 9/10 | 4746 days | 1% |
| Jackie and Brian | 8/10 | 4747 days | 1% |
| Peter | 10/10 | 4748 days | 1% |
| Julia Ramseier | 10/10 | 4767 days | 1% |
| Lisa Blake | 8/10 | 4771 days | 1% |
| Ton Franke | 8/10 | 4771 days | 1% |
| Megan Child | 9/10 | 4772 days | 1% |
| Jonathan Tuthill | 10/10 | 5015 days | 1% |
| Carly Braddock | 10/10 | 5019 days | 1% |
| Def Fem | 8/10 | 5025 days | 1% |
| launch | 7/10 | 5030 days | 1% |
| Michael Jefferies | 9/10 | 5033 days | 1% |
| Mark Bogton | 9/10 | 5039 days | 1% |
| Dominik Langenegger | 10/10 | 5041 days | 1% |
| Moehl | 9/10 | 5042 days | 1% |
| D Collier | 10/10 | 5043 days | 1% |
| Uwe Henze | 8/10 | 5044 days | 1% |
| Ute Rogawski | 7/10 | 5051 days | 1% |
| Nikita Sue | 7/10 | 5052 days | 1% |
| Heewin Otten | 10/10 | 5052 days | 1% |
| D R Valentine | 10/10 | 5053 days | 1% |
| Andreas Kristiansen | 9/10 | 5053 days | 1% |
| Petra | 10/10 | 5054 days | 1% |
| John Reynolds | 10/10 | 5054 days | 1% |
| Katie K | 10/10 | 5068 days | 1% |
| ZephyrTL | 8/10 | 5090 days | 1% |
| Peter, Noelle & Susanne | 10/10 | 5124 days | 1% |
| John & Myra Sloan | 9/10 | 5130 days | 1% |
| Jan & Marian | 10/10 | 5133 days | 1% |
| Andy Lever | 9/10 | 5136 days | 1% |
| Peter Spooner | 8/10 | 5138 days | 1% |
| damaca | 9/10 | 5211 days | 1% |
| Tacksharp | 9/10 | 5273 days | 1% |
| Edward Marhi | 9/10 | 5361 days | 1% |
| Weez18 | 10/10 | 5365 days | 1% |
| de Smedt | 9/10 | 5368 days | 1% |
| Eric Grant | 8/10 | 5370 days | 1% |
| Koen Vanlede | 8/10 | 5382 days | 1% |
| Sue Top | 10/10 | 5383 days | 1% |
| Marty Fey | 5/10 | 5387 days | 1% |
| Gord Carnochan | 9/10 | 5397 days | 1% |
| Pam & Rob Tellwright | 8/10 | 5400 days | 1% |
| Derek Puplett | 9/10 | 5400 days | 1% |
| Callum Sibbald | 8/10 | 5400 days | 1% |
| Gerlach | 8/10 | 5401 days | 1% |
| Agnes McMillan | 10/10 | 5408 days | 1% |
| Jill Dean | 8/10 | 5411 days | 1% |
| Philipp Rau | 8/10 | 5415 days | 1% |
| Eva Stauderova | 10/10 | 5415 days | 1% |
| Annette Mogg | 10/10 | 5420 days | 1% |
| Andrew Hammond | 8/10 | 5547 days | 1% |
| Betty le Brech | 8/10 | 5743 days | 1% |
| Ed & Pat Mitchell | 9/10 | 5769 days | 1% |
| Sue Bennett | 7/10 | 5771 days | 1% |
| Dieter Groscurth | 8/10 | 5771 days | 1% |
| Liz Pursey | 9/10 | 5781 days | 1% |
| pvo plas | 8/10 | 5783 days | 1% |
| Hoogh | 9/10 | 5786 days | 1% |
| Carina Raeder | 8/10 | 5787 days | 1% |
| John Rylance | 10/10 | 5788 days | 1% |
| Lamb | 9/10 | 5788 days | 1% |
| Tonny | 9/10 | 5788 days | 1% |
| Tim | 7/10 | 5789 days | 1% |
| Allan Bond | 7/10 | 5795 days | 1% |
| uleugel | 9/10 | 5798 days | 1% |
| Jeannot Robert | 10/10 | 5799 days | 1% |
| Norbert Hainz | 8/10 | 5802 days | 1% |
| Heino keyssler | 10/10 | 5809 days | 1% |
| T S | 10/10 | 5820 days | 1% |
| eliertv | 9/10 | 5835 days | 1% |
| adamek | 7/10 | 5835 days | 1% |
| frederike | 8/10 | 5836 days | 1% |
| Karin Linder | 9/10 | 5855 days | 1% |
| Bue Verrept | 8/10 | 5858 days | 1% |
| Pia | 2/10 | 5862 days | 0% |
| Gebert | 8/10 | 5862 days | 1% |
| Daniel Alonso | 8/10 | 5863 days | 1% |
| Ana Garcia | 9/10 | 5864 days | 1% |
| Kelly | 10/10 | 6005 days | 1% |
| Johnnie | 8/10 | 6075 days | 1% |
| AndySwitzerland | 8/10 | 6078 days | 1% |
| suet | 7/10 | 6095 days | 1% |
| scottl | 7/10 | 6095 days | 1% |
| neeltjec | 9/10 | 6095 days | 1% |
| Martien van Brakel | 9/10 | 6095 days | 1% |
| BevanLisa | 8/10 | 6112 days | 1% |
| JeremyE | 8/10 | 6113 days | 1% |
| TessaW | 4/10 | 6113 days | 1% |
| LucyT | 10/10 | 6113 days | 1% |
| Florens | 8/10 | 6115 days | 1% |
| Joel | 7/10 | 6115 days | 1% |
| Tiemen | 7/10 | 6115 days | 1% |
| NikkiB1 | 9/10 | 6130 days | 1% |
| BrunoS | 9/10 | 6130 days | 1% |
| JoseB | 9/10 | 6137 days | 1% |
| Debbie | 9/10 | 6137 days | 1% |
| InkenGermany | 9/10 | 6137 days | 1% |
| John | 7/10 | 6144 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 Picton Tasman Holiday Parks experience has plenty of reviews and does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
Recent Reviews Adjustment
-3.50% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 42 days. However the Picton Tasman Holiday Parks 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 Picton Tasman Holiday Parks experience has been adjusted for 172 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 169 | -3.44% |
| 170 | -3.46% |
| 171 | -3.48% |
| 172 | -3.50% |
| 173 | -3.52% |
| 174 | -3.54% |
| 175 | -3.56% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
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 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
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.