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
90.26%
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 | 197 days | 100% |
| Jason C | 10/10 | 258 days | 99% |
| Donna | 10/10 | 258 days | 99% |
| Aoife | 8/10 | 440 days | 90% |
| Laura | 9/10 | 1020 days | 43% |
| Ferg | 10/10 | 1020 days | 43% |
| Inge | 8/10 | 1079 days | 37% |
| Cindi Wight | 9/10 | 1140 days | 32% |
| Sarah | 8/10 | 1171 days | 30% |
| Alexis | 10/10 | 2023 days | 5% |
| Cody | 10/10 | 2115 days | 5% |
| Mike Smith | 7/10 | 2175 days | 4% |
| Beth Carlton | 1/10 | 2236 days | 2% |
| Christian | 10/10 | 2509 days | 4% |
| Emma | 9/10 | 2540 days | 4% |
| Demi Thompson | 6/10 | 2601 days | 3% |
| Brett See | 9/10 | 2632 days | 3% |
| Mike Fricker | 9/10 | 2632 days | 3% |
| Urs Bruderer | 10/10 | 3320 days | 2% |
| Leslie Lindeman | 10/10 | 3532 days | 2% |
| Ray Tombs | 9/10 | 3535 days | 2% |
| Phillippa McLernon | 8/10 | 3593 days | 2% |
| Tine Fook | 6/10 | 3629 days | 1% |
| Jan Towers | 8/10 | 4274 days | 0% |
| Brita Topp | 8/10 | 4276 days | 0% |
| Mike Fricker | 8/10 | 4276 days | 0% |
| Mark Towers | 8/10 | 4307 days | 0% |
| Rikke Petersen | 9/10 | 4325 days | 0% |
| Ted Cole | 8/10 | 4335 days | 0% |
| Nigel | 8/10 | 4342 days | 0% |
| catherine welsh | 8/10 | 4366 days | 0% |
| Nigel & Annie Dale | 8/10 | 4427 days | 1% |
| ozelmer | 6/10 | 4488 days | 1% |
| AusCampa | 9/10 | 4611 days | 1% |
| Mark Wiggington | 7/10 | 4635 days | 1% |
| Ken Milligan | 8/10 | 4659 days | 1% |
| Gale Willcocks | 10/10 | 4665 days | 1% |
| Ken Richardson | 8/10 | 4665 days | 1% |
| Heather Macdonald | 9/10 | 4700 days | 1% |
| Nadine | 9/10 | 4744 days | 1% |
| Robert Staeller | 8/10 | 4747 days | 1% |
| David and Sally Wallis | 9/10 | 4753 days | 1% |
| Jackie and Brian | 8/10 | 4754 days | 1% |
| Peter | 10/10 | 4755 days | 1% |
| Julia Ramseier | 10/10 | 4774 days | 1% |
| Lisa Blake | 8/10 | 4778 days | 1% |
| Ton Franke | 8/10 | 4778 days | 1% |
| Megan Child | 9/10 | 4779 days | 1% |
| Jonathan Tuthill | 10/10 | 5022 days | 1% |
| Carly Braddock | 10/10 | 5026 days | 1% |
| Def Fem | 8/10 | 5032 days | 1% |
| launch | 7/10 | 5037 days | 1% |
| Michael Jefferies | 9/10 | 5040 days | 1% |
| Mark Bogton | 9/10 | 5046 days | 1% |
| Dominik Langenegger | 10/10 | 5048 days | 1% |
| Moehl | 9/10 | 5049 days | 1% |
| D Collier | 10/10 | 5050 days | 1% |
| Uwe Henze | 8/10 | 5051 days | 1% |
| Ute Rogawski | 7/10 | 5058 days | 1% |
| Nikita Sue | 7/10 | 5059 days | 1% |
| Heewin Otten | 10/10 | 5059 days | 1% |
| D R Valentine | 10/10 | 5060 days | 1% |
| Andreas Kristiansen | 9/10 | 5060 days | 1% |
| Petra | 10/10 | 5061 days | 1% |
| John Reynolds | 10/10 | 5061 days | 1% |
| Katie K | 10/10 | 5075 days | 1% |
| ZephyrTL | 8/10 | 5097 days | 1% |
| Peter, Noelle & Susanne | 10/10 | 5131 days | 1% |
| John & Myra Sloan | 9/10 | 5137 days | 1% |
| Jan & Marian | 10/10 | 5140 days | 1% |
| Andy Lever | 9/10 | 5143 days | 1% |
| Peter Spooner | 8/10 | 5145 days | 1% |
| damaca | 9/10 | 5219 days | 1% |
| Tacksharp | 9/10 | 5281 days | 1% |
| Edward Marhi | 9/10 | 5369 days | 1% |
| Weez18 | 10/10 | 5372 days | 1% |
| de Smedt | 9/10 | 5375 days | 1% |
| Eric Grant | 8/10 | 5377 days | 1% |
| Koen Vanlede | 8/10 | 5389 days | 1% |
| Sue Top | 10/10 | 5390 days | 1% |
| Marty Fey | 5/10 | 5394 days | 1% |
| Gord Carnochan | 9/10 | 5404 days | 1% |
| Pam & Rob Tellwright | 8/10 | 5407 days | 1% |
| Derek Puplett | 9/10 | 5407 days | 1% |
| Callum Sibbald | 8/10 | 5407 days | 1% |
| Gerlach | 8/10 | 5408 days | 1% |
| Agnes McMillan | 10/10 | 5415 days | 1% |
| Jill Dean | 8/10 | 5418 days | 1% |
| Philipp Rau | 8/10 | 5422 days | 1% |
| Eva Stauderova | 10/10 | 5422 days | 1% |
| Annette Mogg | 10/10 | 5427 days | 1% |
| Andrew Hammond | 8/10 | 5554 days | 1% |
| Betty le Brech | 8/10 | 5750 days | 1% |
| Ed & Pat Mitchell | 9/10 | 5776 days | 1% |
| Sue Bennett | 7/10 | 5778 days | 1% |
| Dieter Groscurth | 8/10 | 5778 days | 1% |
| Liz Pursey | 9/10 | 5788 days | 1% |
| pvo plas | 8/10 | 5790 days | 1% |
| Hoogh | 9/10 | 5793 days | 1% |
| Carina Raeder | 8/10 | 5794 days | 1% |
| John Rylance | 10/10 | 5795 days | 1% |
| Lamb | 9/10 | 5795 days | 1% |
| Tonny | 9/10 | 5795 days | 1% |
| Tim | 7/10 | 5796 days | 1% |
| Allan Bond | 7/10 | 5802 days | 1% |
| uleugel | 9/10 | 5805 days | 1% |
| Jeannot Robert | 10/10 | 5806 days | 1% |
| Norbert Hainz | 8/10 | 5809 days | 1% |
| Heino keyssler | 10/10 | 5816 days | 1% |
| T S | 10/10 | 5827 days | 1% |
| eliertv | 9/10 | 5842 days | 1% |
| adamek | 7/10 | 5842 days | 1% |
| frederike | 8/10 | 5843 days | 1% |
| Karin Linder | 9/10 | 5862 days | 1% |
| Bue Verrept | 8/10 | 5865 days | 1% |
| Pia | 2/10 | 5869 days | 0% |
| Gebert | 8/10 | 5869 days | 1% |
| Daniel Alonso | 8/10 | 5870 days | 1% |
| Ana Garcia | 9/10 | 5871 days | 1% |
| Kelly | 10/10 | 6013 days | 1% |
| Johnnie | 8/10 | 6083 days | 1% |
| AndySwitzerland | 8/10 | 6086 days | 1% |
| suet | 7/10 | 6102 days | 1% |
| scottl | 7/10 | 6102 days | 1% |
| neeltjec | 9/10 | 6102 days | 1% |
| Martien van Brakel | 9/10 | 6102 days | 1% |
| BevanLisa | 8/10 | 6119 days | 1% |
| JeremyE | 8/10 | 6120 days | 1% |
| TessaW | 4/10 | 6120 days | 1% |
| LucyT | 10/10 | 6120 days | 1% |
| Florens | 8/10 | 6122 days | 1% |
| Joel | 7/10 | 6122 days | 1% |
| Tiemen | 7/10 | 6122 days | 1% |
| NikkiB1 | 9/10 | 6137 days | 1% |
| BrunoS | 9/10 | 6137 days | 1% |
| JoseB | 9/10 | 6144 days | 1% |
| Debbie | 9/10 | 6144 days | 1% |
| InkenGermany | 9/10 | 6144 days | 1% |
| John | 7/10 | 6151 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
-3.63% 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 179 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 176 | -3.57% |
| 177 | -3.59% |
| 178 | -3.61% |
| 179 | -3.63% |
| 180 | -3.65% |
| 181 | -3.67% |
| 182 | -3.69% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
1.52% 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.