Hey, 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
97.71%
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 | 202 days | 100% |
| Viktoria | 10/10 | 202 days | 100% |
| Steve | 9/10 | 291 days | 96% |
| EI | 10/10 | 383 days | 94% |
| Andi | 10/10 | 383 days | 94% |
| Hannah | 8/10 | 383 days | 92% |
| Joe | 10/10 | 414 days | 92% |
| Aragorn | 10/10 | 567 days | 84% |
| Thomas | 10/10 | 657 days | 77% |
| Pierre and Martine | 10/10 | 657 days | 77% |
| Mike Howe | 10/10 | 657 days | 77% |
| Sebastian | 10/10 | 688 days | 75% |
| Thomas & Annette | 10/10 | 719 days | 72% |
| Anna | 10/10 | 780 days | 67% |
| Zoe M | 10/10 | 780 days | 67% |
| Thomas Engelhardt | 10/10 | 810 days | 64% |
| RM | 10/10 | 872 days | 58% |
| Corinne | 8/10 | 933 days | 51% |
| ellie | 10/10 | 933 days | 52% |
| Brendan | 10/10 | 963 days | 49% |
| Steve | 10/10 | 994 days | 45% |
| Milly | 10/10 | 1022 days | 43% |
| Sarah Woolley | 10/10 | 1022 days | 43% |
| Imme | 10/10 | 1053 days | 40% |
| Christian Wood | 10/10 | 1053 days | 40% |
| Kevin McCall | 10/10 | 1084 days | 37% |
| Ralph | 10/10 | 1449 days | 13% |
| Bex & Carl | 10/10 | 1449 days | 13% |
| Gem | 10/10 | 1479 days | 12% |
| Andrew | 10/10 | 1663 days | 7% |
| Kristine V | 10/10 | 1693 days | 6% |
| Barbora | 10/10 | 1752 days | 5% |
| Cloe | 10/10 | 1936 days | 5% |
| Kay | 8/10 | 1997 days | 5% |
| Isabella S | 10/10 | 2028 days | 5% |
| Elin Pranter | 10/10 | 2058 days | 5% |
| Zuzana and family | 10/10 | 2089 days | 5% |
| Just a guy | 10/10 | 2089 days | 5% |
| Liz Wade | 8/10 | 2117 days | 4% |
| Tom S | 10/10 | 2149 days | 4% |
| Erica | 8/10 | 2149 days | 4% |
| Dieter Giesen | 10/10 | 2149 days | 4% |
| Robert | 10/10 | 2180 days | 4% |
| Chris | 10/10 | 2180 days | 4% |
| Callum Mann | 10/10 | 2241 days | 4% |
| Martin Hansen | 10/10 | 2241 days | 4% |
| angelika19 | 10/10 | 2241 days | 4% |
| Anonymous | 10/10 | 2302 days | 4% |
| Anonymous | 10/10 | 2333 days | 4% |
| Nia | 9/10 | 2424 days | 4% |
| Maeike | 9/10 | 2455 days | 4% |
| Maika Laura | 10/10 | 2455 days | 4% |
| Axel & Sabine | 10/10 | 2455 days | 4% |
| Michael | 10/10 | 2483 days | 4% |
| Simone Maccagnan | 10/10 | 2514 days | 4% |
| Beate | 9/10 | 2514 days | 4% |
| Jonas and Lottie | 10/10 | 2545 days | 4% |
| Anita | 9/10 | 2545 days | 4% |
| Lance | 10/10 | 2575 days | 4% |
| Julia Thompson | 10/10 | 2575 days | 4% |
| Brett See | 10/10 | 2606 days | 4% |
| Grizzly Girl | 9/10 | 2606 days | 4% |
| kael Matthews | 9/10 | 2606 days | 4% |
| Kimberly | 10/10 | 2636 days | 3% |
| Jenna webber | 9/10 | 2636 days | 3% |
| Karina | 10/10 | 2820 days | 3% |
| Alde | 10/10 | 2820 days | 3% |
| The Weathersons | 9/10 | 2833 days | 2% |
| Tina Elsdon | 10/10 | 2878 days | 3% |
| Joanna du Toit | 9/10 | 2909 days | 3% |
| Nel Warnaar | 10/10 | 2915 days | 3% |
| Nigel Chapman | 10/10 | 2939 days | 3% |
| Craig Cini | 10/10 | 3004 days | 3% |
| Daniel Unkel | 10/10 | 3053 days | 3% |
| Eric Adelman | 10/10 | 3100 days | 3% |
| Jo Clarke | 8/10 | 3141 days | 2% |
| Jason Morehouse | 10/10 | 3184 days | 2% |
| Alan Brown | 5/10 | 3213 days | 2% |
| Matthias Wohlgemuth | 7/10 | 3227 days | 2% |
| Leilani Lemusu-Read | 10/10 | 3243 days | 2% |
| Kathrin Weigl | 10/10 | 3261 days | 2% |
| Yachar Tajamady | 10/10 | 3302 days | 2% |
| Tina Brill | 10/10 | 3335 days | 2% |
| Robert Ciarrocchi | 10/10 | 3403 days | 2% |
| Courtney | 10/10 | 3428 days | 2% |
| Cullen Wiginton | 10/10 | 3470 days | 2% |
| Alan Honey | 9/10 | 3500 days | 2% |
| Shaun Burns | 10/10 | 3508 days | 2% |
| Etienne Boeziek | 10/10 | 3512 days | 2% |
| Julia Clark | 9/10 | 3536 days | 2% |
| Sandra Kruse | 10/10 | 3538 days | 2% |
| Victoria Lee | 10/10 | 3618 days | 2% |
| Max Brunner | 10/10 | 3633 days | 1% |
| Hanna from Germany | 10/10 | 3645 days | 1% |
| Sarah Gurney | 10/10 | 3670 days | 1% |
| Ron Web | 10/10 | 3670 days | 1% |
| Claudius How | 10/10 | 3671 days | 1% |
| Jayne Lewis | 10/10 | 3671 days | 1% |
| Jade Duncan | 10/10 | 3689 days | 1% |
| Steve Warren | 10/10 | 3700 days | 1% |
| Megan | 10/10 | 3731 days | 1% |
| Nicolas Justin | 10/10 | 3906 days | 1% |
| Julia | 10/10 | 3915 days | 1% |
| John Wray | 10/10 | 3943 days | 1% |
| Constantin D | 10/10 | 3956 days | 1% |
| Jonathan Arndt | 10/10 | 3957 days | 1% |
| Virpi Andersson | 10/10 | 3974 days | 1% |
| Dieter Schmees | 9/10 | 3987 days | 1% |
| Manuela | 10/10 | 4002 days | 1% |
| Dieter & Lydia Schmees | 9/10 | 4005 days | 1% |
| Bert Snel | 10/10 | 4005 days | 1% |
| oren schnabel | 10/10 | 4005 days | 1% |
| SUE COLEMAN | 9/10 | 4005 days | 1% |
| Astrid Egesten | 9/10 | 4013 days | 0% |
| Gianpiero Rodari | 9/10 | 4035 days | 1% |
| sahni | 9/10 | 4220 days | 0% |
| Jan Legein | 10/10 | 4258 days | 0% |
| Josefin Lind | 9/10 | 4260 days | 0% |
| Herman Holmgist | 9/10 | 4260 days | 0% |
| Leeann Newton | 9/10 | 4307 days | 0% |
| Andrew Young | 10/10 | 4309 days | 0% |
| GN100 | 9/10 | 4309 days | 0% |
| Michael Turek | 10/10 | 4340 days | 0% |
| Linda Morey | 10/10 | 4340 days | 0% |
| Eric and Nienke | 8/10 | 4371 days | 0% |
| Julian Kemp | 10/10 | 4401 days | 1% |
| Steve Warren | 10/10 | 4432 days | 1% |
| PaulMacca | 10/10 | 4524 days | 1% |
| AoP | 10/10 | 4646 days | 1% |
| Penny Compton | 10/10 | 4646 days | 1% |
| Julian Roots | 8/10 | 4646 days | 1% |
| Helen and Ogi | 10/10 | 4659 days | 1% |
| Lis Bon | 10/10 | 4674 days | 1% |
| Pahlfamily | 10/10 | 4705 days | 1% |
| Joroen Borkert | 9/10 | 4723 days | 1% |
| Johannes OBerlin | 10/10 | 5008 days | 1% |
| Shavill | 10/10 | 5011 days | 1% |
| Michael Stoll | 10/10 | 5021 days | 1% |
| E Smudde | 8/10 | 5024 days | 1% |
| RhysWendy | 10/10 | 5071 days | 1% |
| Ken Jones | 9/10 | 5352 days | 1% |
| Steve Waterhouse | 8/10 | 5362 days | 1% |
| Jan Visser | 8/10 | 5377 days | 1% |
| Victoria Purver | 10/10 | 5380 days | 1% |
| Andrew Koster | 9/10 | 5390 days | 1% |
| Emma Edis-Bates | 9/10 | 5393 days | 1% |
| rhubarbsky | 10/10 | 5467 days | 1% |
| krisevelyn | 9/10 | 5681 days | 1% |
| Caitriona Doyle | 10/10 | 5764 days | 1% |
| Hanz | 10/10 | 5766 days | 1% |
| Linley Faulkner | 10/10 | 5770 days | 1% |
| EA Anders | 10/10 | 5787 days | 1% |
| Family van Hessem | 8/10 | 5790 days | 1% |
| Anna | 10/10 | 5840 days | 1% |
| Jessica Clarisse | 10/10 | 5844 days | 1% |
| Christine Suess | 10/10 | 5844 days | 1% |
| LindaV | 8/10 | 6110 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
-3.81% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 44 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 189 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 186 | -3.75% |
| 187 | -3.77% |
| 188 | -3.79% |
| 189 | -3.81% |
| 190 | -3.83% |
| 191 | -3.85% |
| 192 | -3.87% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
0.54% 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 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
95%
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.