Hi, 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 Smiths Farm Holiday 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.
Smiths Farm Holiday Park
Valid Reviews
157 Valid Reviews
The Smiths Farm Holiday Park experience has a total of 159 reviews. There are 157 valid reviews that are included when calculating the ranking score and 2 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 157 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 115 |
|
73% |
| 9/10 | 27 |
|
17% |
| 8/10 | 13 |
|
8% |
| 7/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 6/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 5/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
96.11% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Smiths Farm Holiday Park valid reviews is 96.11% and is based on 157 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
29 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 157 valid reviews, the experience has 29 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 29 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 13 |
|
45% |
| 9/10 | 11 |
|
38% |
| 8/10 | 5 |
|
17% |
| 7/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 6/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 5/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
92.76% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Smiths Farm Holiday Park face-to-face reviews is 92.76% and is based on 29 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
97.68%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Scott Asplin | 10/10 | 220 days | 100% |
| Viktoria | 10/10 | 220 days | 100% |
| Steve | 9/10 | 309 days | 96% |
| EI | 10/10 | 401 days | 93% |
| Andi | 10/10 | 401 days | 93% |
| Hannah | 8/10 | 401 days | 92% |
| Joe | 10/10 | 432 days | 92% |
| Aragorn | 10/10 | 585 days | 83% |
| Thomas | 10/10 | 675 days | 76% |
| Pierre and Martine | 10/10 | 675 days | 76% |
| Mike Howe | 10/10 | 675 days | 76% |
| Sebastian | 10/10 | 706 days | 74% |
| Thomas & Annette | 10/10 | 737 days | 71% |
| Anna | 10/10 | 798 days | 65% |
| Zoe M | 10/10 | 798 days | 65% |
| Thomas Engelhardt | 10/10 | 828 days | 63% |
| RM | 10/10 | 890 days | 56% |
| Corinne | 8/10 | 951 days | 49% |
| ellie | 10/10 | 951 days | 50% |
| Brendan | 10/10 | 981 days | 47% |
| Steve | 10/10 | 1012 days | 44% |
| Milly | 10/10 | 1040 days | 41% |
| Sarah Woolley | 10/10 | 1040 days | 41% |
| Imme | 10/10 | 1071 days | 38% |
| Christian Wood | 10/10 | 1071 days | 38% |
| Kevin McCall | 10/10 | 1102 days | 36% |
| Ralph | 10/10 | 1467 days | 13% |
| Bex & Carl | 10/10 | 1467 days | 13% |
| Gem | 10/10 | 1497 days | 11% |
| Andrew | 10/10 | 1681 days | 6% |
| Kristine V | 10/10 | 1711 days | 6% |
| Barbora | 10/10 | 1770 days | 5% |
| Cloe | 10/10 | 1954 days | 5% |
| Kay | 8/10 | 2015 days | 5% |
| Isabella S | 10/10 | 2046 days | 5% |
| Elin Pranter | 10/10 | 2076 days | 5% |
| Zuzana and family | 10/10 | 2107 days | 5% |
| Just a guy | 10/10 | 2107 days | 5% |
| Liz Wade | 8/10 | 2136 days | 4% |
| Tom S | 10/10 | 2167 days | 4% |
| Erica | 8/10 | 2167 days | 4% |
| Dieter Giesen | 10/10 | 2167 days | 4% |
| Robert | 10/10 | 2198 days | 4% |
| Chris | 10/10 | 2198 days | 4% |
| Callum Mann | 10/10 | 2259 days | 4% |
| Martin Hansen | 10/10 | 2259 days | 4% |
| angelika19 | 10/10 | 2259 days | 4% |
| Anonymous | 10/10 | 2320 days | 4% |
| Anonymous | 10/10 | 2351 days | 4% |
| Nia | 9/10 | 2442 days | 4% |
| Maeike | 9/10 | 2473 days | 4% |
| Maika Laura | 10/10 | 2473 days | 4% |
| Axel & Sabine | 10/10 | 2473 days | 4% |
| Michael | 10/10 | 2501 days | 4% |
| Simone Maccagnan | 10/10 | 2532 days | 4% |
| Beate | 9/10 | 2532 days | 4% |
| Jonas and Lottie | 10/10 | 2563 days | 4% |
| Anita | 9/10 | 2563 days | 4% |
| Lance | 10/10 | 2593 days | 4% |
| Julia Thompson | 10/10 | 2593 days | 4% |
| Brett See | 10/10 | 2624 days | 3% |
| Grizzly Girl | 9/10 | 2624 days | 3% |
| kael Matthews | 9/10 | 2624 days | 3% |
| Kimberly | 10/10 | 2654 days | 3% |
| Jenna webber | 9/10 | 2654 days | 3% |
| Karina | 10/10 | 2838 days | 3% |
| Alde | 10/10 | 2838 days | 3% |
| The Weathersons | 9/10 | 2851 days | 2% |
| Tina Elsdon | 10/10 | 2897 days | 3% |
| Joanna du Toit | 9/10 | 2928 days | 3% |
| Nel Warnaar | 10/10 | 2933 days | 3% |
| Nigel Chapman | 10/10 | 2957 days | 3% |
| Craig Cini | 10/10 | 3022 days | 3% |
| Daniel Unkel | 10/10 | 3071 days | 3% |
| Eric Adelman | 10/10 | 3118 days | 2% |
| Jo Clarke | 8/10 | 3159 days | 2% |
| Jason Morehouse | 10/10 | 3203 days | 2% |
| Alan Brown | 5/10 | 3231 days | 2% |
| Matthias Wohlgemuth | 7/10 | 3245 days | 2% |
| Leilani Lemusu-Read | 10/10 | 3262 days | 2% |
| Kathrin Weigl | 10/10 | 3279 days | 2% |
| Yachar Tajamady | 10/10 | 3320 days | 2% |
| Tina Brill | 10/10 | 3354 days | 2% |
| Robert Ciarrocchi | 10/10 | 3421 days | 2% |
| Courtney | 10/10 | 3446 days | 2% |
| Cullen Wiginton | 10/10 | 3488 days | 2% |
| Alan Honey | 9/10 | 3518 days | 2% |
| Shaun Burns | 10/10 | 3526 days | 2% |
| Etienne Boeziek | 10/10 | 3530 days | 2% |
| Julia Clark | 9/10 | 3554 days | 2% |
| Sandra Kruse | 10/10 | 3556 days | 2% |
| Victoria Lee | 10/10 | 3636 days | 1% |
| Max Brunner | 10/10 | 3651 days | 1% |
| Hanna from Germany | 10/10 | 3663 days | 1% |
| Sarah Gurney | 10/10 | 3688 days | 1% |
| Ron Web | 10/10 | 3689 days | 1% |
| Claudius How | 10/10 | 3689 days | 1% |
| Jayne Lewis | 10/10 | 3689 days | 1% |
| Jade Duncan | 10/10 | 3707 days | 1% |
| Steve Warren | 10/10 | 3718 days | 1% |
| Megan | 10/10 | 3750 days | 1% |
| Nicolas Justin | 10/10 | 3924 days | 1% |
| Julia | 10/10 | 3934 days | 1% |
| John Wray | 10/10 | 3962 days | 1% |
| Constantin D | 10/10 | 3974 days | 1% |
| Jonathan Arndt | 10/10 | 3975 days | 1% |
| Virpi Andersson | 10/10 | 3993 days | 1% |
| Dieter Schmees | 9/10 | 4005 days | 0% |
| Manuela | 10/10 | 4020 days | 0% |
| Dieter & Lydia Schmees | 9/10 | 4024 days | 1% |
| Bert Snel | 10/10 | 4024 days | 1% |
| oren schnabel | 10/10 | 4024 days | 1% |
| SUE COLEMAN | 9/10 | 4024 days | 1% |
| Astrid Egesten | 9/10 | 4031 days | 0% |
| Gianpiero Rodari | 9/10 | 4054 days | 1% |
| sahni | 9/10 | 4238 days | 0% |
| Jan Legein | 10/10 | 4276 days | 0% |
| Josefin Lind | 9/10 | 4278 days | 0% |
| Herman Holmgist | 9/10 | 4278 days | 0% |
| Leeann Newton | 9/10 | 4325 days | 0% |
| Andrew Young | 10/10 | 4327 days | 0% |
| GN100 | 9/10 | 4327 days | 0% |
| Michael Turek | 10/10 | 4358 days | 0% |
| Linda Morey | 10/10 | 4358 days | 0% |
| Eric and Nienke | 8/10 | 4389 days | 1% |
| Julian Kemp | 10/10 | 4419 days | 1% |
| Steve Warren | 10/10 | 4450 days | 1% |
| PaulMacca | 10/10 | 4542 days | 1% |
| AoP | 10/10 | 4664 days | 1% |
| Penny Compton | 10/10 | 4664 days | 1% |
| Julian Roots | 8/10 | 4664 days | 1% |
| Helen and Ogi | 10/10 | 4677 days | 1% |
| Lis Bon | 10/10 | 4692 days | 1% |
| Pahlfamily | 10/10 | 4723 days | 1% |
| Joroen Borkert | 9/10 | 4741 days | 1% |
| Johannes OBerlin | 10/10 | 5026 days | 1% |
| Shavill | 10/10 | 5029 days | 1% |
| Michael Stoll | 10/10 | 5039 days | 1% |
| E Smudde | 8/10 | 5042 days | 1% |
| RhysWendy | 10/10 | 5089 days | 1% |
| Ken Jones | 9/10 | 5370 days | 1% |
| Steve Waterhouse | 8/10 | 5380 days | 1% |
| Jan Visser | 8/10 | 5395 days | 1% |
| Victoria Purver | 10/10 | 5398 days | 1% |
| Andrew Koster | 9/10 | 5408 days | 1% |
| Emma Edis-Bates | 9/10 | 5411 days | 1% |
| rhubarbsky | 10/10 | 5485 days | 1% |
| krisevelyn | 9/10 | 5699 days | 1% |
| Caitriona Doyle | 10/10 | 5782 days | 1% |
| Hanz | 10/10 | 5784 days | 1% |
| Linley Faulkner | 10/10 | 5788 days | 1% |
| EA Anders | 10/10 | 5805 days | 1% |
| Family van Hessem | 8/10 | 5808 days | 1% |
| Anna | 10/10 | 5858 days | 1% |
| Jessica Clarisse | 10/10 | 5862 days | 1% |
| Christine Suess | 10/10 | 5862 days | 1% |
| LindaV | 8/10 | 6128 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 Smiths Farm Holiday Park experience has plenty of reviews and does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
Recent Reviews Adjustment
-4.07% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 42 days. However the Smiths Farm Holiday Park 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 Smiths Farm Holiday Park experience has been adjusted for 200 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 197 | -4.01% |
| 198 | -4.03% |
| 199 | -4.05% |
| 200 | -4.07% |
| 201 | -4.09% |
| 202 | -4.11% |
| 203 | -4.13% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
0.57% 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
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.