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 | 230 days | 100% |
| Viktoria | 10/10 | 230 days | 100% |
| Steve | 9/10 | 319 days | 96% |
| EI | 10/10 | 411 days | 93% |
| Andi | 10/10 | 411 days | 93% |
| Hannah | 8/10 | 411 days | 91% |
| Joe | 10/10 | 442 days | 92% |
| Aragorn | 10/10 | 595 days | 82% |
| Thomas | 10/10 | 685 days | 76% |
| Pierre and Martine | 10/10 | 685 days | 76% |
| Mike Howe | 10/10 | 685 days | 76% |
| Sebastian | 10/10 | 716 days | 73% |
| Thomas & Annette | 10/10 | 747 days | 70% |
| Anna | 10/10 | 808 days | 65% |
| Zoe M | 10/10 | 808 days | 65% |
| Thomas Engelhardt | 10/10 | 838 days | 62% |
| RM | 10/10 | 900 days | 55% |
| Corinne | 8/10 | 961 days | 48% |
| ellie | 10/10 | 961 days | 49% |
| Brendan | 10/10 | 991 days | 46% |
| Steve | 10/10 | 1022 days | 43% |
| Milly | 10/10 | 1050 days | 40% |
| Sarah Woolley | 10/10 | 1050 days | 40% |
| Imme | 10/10 | 1081 days | 38% |
| Christian Wood | 10/10 | 1081 days | 38% |
| Kevin McCall | 10/10 | 1112 days | 35% |
| Ralph | 10/10 | 1477 days | 12% |
| Bex & Carl | 10/10 | 1477 days | 12% |
| Gem | 10/10 | 1507 days | 11% |
| Andrew | 10/10 | 1691 days | 6% |
| Kristine V | 10/10 | 1721 days | 6% |
| Barbora | 10/10 | 1780 days | 5% |
| Cloe | 10/10 | 1964 days | 5% |
| Kay | 8/10 | 2025 days | 5% |
| Isabella S | 10/10 | 2056 days | 5% |
| Elin Pranter | 10/10 | 2086 days | 5% |
| Zuzana and family | 10/10 | 2117 days | 5% |
| Just a guy | 10/10 | 2117 days | 5% |
| Liz Wade | 8/10 | 2145 days | 4% |
| Tom S | 10/10 | 2177 days | 4% |
| Erica | 8/10 | 2177 days | 4% |
| Dieter Giesen | 10/10 | 2177 days | 4% |
| Robert | 10/10 | 2208 days | 4% |
| Chris | 10/10 | 2208 days | 4% |
| Callum Mann | 10/10 | 2269 days | 4% |
| Martin Hansen | 10/10 | 2269 days | 4% |
| angelika19 | 10/10 | 2269 days | 4% |
| Anonymous | 10/10 | 2330 days | 4% |
| Anonymous | 10/10 | 2361 days | 4% |
| Nia | 9/10 | 2452 days | 4% |
| Maeike | 9/10 | 2483 days | 4% |
| Maika Laura | 10/10 | 2483 days | 4% |
| Axel & Sabine | 10/10 | 2483 days | 4% |
| Michael | 10/10 | 2511 days | 4% |
| Simone Maccagnan | 10/10 | 2542 days | 4% |
| Beate | 9/10 | 2542 days | 4% |
| Jonas and Lottie | 10/10 | 2573 days | 4% |
| Anita | 9/10 | 2573 days | 4% |
| Lance | 10/10 | 2603 days | 4% |
| Julia Thompson | 10/10 | 2603 days | 4% |
| Brett See | 10/10 | 2634 days | 3% |
| Grizzly Girl | 9/10 | 2634 days | 3% |
| kael Matthews | 9/10 | 2634 days | 3% |
| Kimberly | 10/10 | 2664 days | 3% |
| Jenna webber | 9/10 | 2664 days | 3% |
| Karina | 10/10 | 2848 days | 3% |
| Alde | 10/10 | 2848 days | 3% |
| The Weathersons | 9/10 | 2861 days | 2% |
| Tina Elsdon | 10/10 | 2906 days | 3% |
| Joanna du Toit | 9/10 | 2937 days | 3% |
| Nel Warnaar | 10/10 | 2943 days | 3% |
| Nigel Chapman | 10/10 | 2967 days | 3% |
| Craig Cini | 10/10 | 3032 days | 3% |
| Daniel Unkel | 10/10 | 3081 days | 3% |
| Eric Adelman | 10/10 | 3128 days | 3% |
| Jo Clarke | 8/10 | 3169 days | 2% |
| Jason Morehouse | 10/10 | 3212 days | 2% |
| Alan Brown | 5/10 | 3241 days | 2% |
| Matthias Wohlgemuth | 7/10 | 3255 days | 2% |
| Leilani Lemusu-Read | 10/10 | 3271 days | 2% |
| Kathrin Weigl | 10/10 | 3289 days | 2% |
| Yachar Tajamady | 10/10 | 3330 days | 2% |
| Tina Brill | 10/10 | 3363 days | 2% |
| Robert Ciarrocchi | 10/10 | 3431 days | 2% |
| Courtney | 10/10 | 3456 days | 2% |
| Cullen Wiginton | 10/10 | 3498 days | 2% |
| Alan Honey | 9/10 | 3528 days | 2% |
| Shaun Burns | 10/10 | 3536 days | 2% |
| Etienne Boeziek | 10/10 | 3540 days | 2% |
| Julia Clark | 9/10 | 3564 days | 2% |
| Sandra Kruse | 10/10 | 3566 days | 2% |
| Victoria Lee | 10/10 | 3646 days | 1% |
| Max Brunner | 10/10 | 3661 days | 1% |
| Hanna from Germany | 10/10 | 3673 days | 1% |
| Sarah Gurney | 10/10 | 3698 days | 1% |
| Ron Web | 10/10 | 3698 days | 1% |
| Claudius How | 10/10 | 3699 days | 1% |
| Jayne Lewis | 10/10 | 3699 days | 1% |
| Jade Duncan | 10/10 | 3717 days | 1% |
| Steve Warren | 10/10 | 3728 days | 1% |
| Megan | 10/10 | 3759 days | 1% |
| Nicolas Justin | 10/10 | 3934 days | 1% |
| Julia | 10/10 | 3943 days | 1% |
| John Wray | 10/10 | 3971 days | 1% |
| Constantin D | 10/10 | 3984 days | 1% |
| Jonathan Arndt | 10/10 | 3985 days | 1% |
| Virpi Andersson | 10/10 | 4002 days | 1% |
| Dieter Schmees | 9/10 | 4015 days | 0% |
| Manuela | 10/10 | 4030 days | 0% |
| Dieter & Lydia Schmees | 9/10 | 4033 days | 1% |
| Bert Snel | 10/10 | 4033 days | 1% |
| oren schnabel | 10/10 | 4033 days | 1% |
| SUE COLEMAN | 9/10 | 4033 days | 1% |
| Astrid Egesten | 9/10 | 4041 days | 0% |
| Gianpiero Rodari | 9/10 | 4063 days | 1% |
| sahni | 9/10 | 4248 days | 0% |
| Jan Legein | 10/10 | 4286 days | 0% |
| Josefin Lind | 9/10 | 4288 days | 0% |
| Herman Holmgist | 9/10 | 4288 days | 0% |
| Leeann Newton | 9/10 | 4335 days | 0% |
| Andrew Young | 10/10 | 4337 days | 0% |
| GN100 | 9/10 | 4337 days | 0% |
| Michael Turek | 10/10 | 4368 days | 0% |
| Linda Morey | 10/10 | 4368 days | 0% |
| Eric and Nienke | 8/10 | 4399 days | 1% |
| Julian Kemp | 10/10 | 4429 days | 1% |
| Steve Warren | 10/10 | 4460 days | 1% |
| PaulMacca | 10/10 | 4552 days | 1% |
| AoP | 10/10 | 4674 days | 1% |
| Penny Compton | 10/10 | 4674 days | 1% |
| Julian Roots | 8/10 | 4674 days | 1% |
| Helen and Ogi | 10/10 | 4687 days | 1% |
| Lis Bon | 10/10 | 4702 days | 1% |
| Pahlfamily | 10/10 | 4733 days | 1% |
| Joroen Borkert | 9/10 | 4751 days | 1% |
| Johannes OBerlin | 10/10 | 5036 days | 1% |
| Shavill | 10/10 | 5039 days | 1% |
| Michael Stoll | 10/10 | 5049 days | 1% |
| E Smudde | 8/10 | 5052 days | 1% |
| RhysWendy | 10/10 | 5099 days | 1% |
| Ken Jones | 9/10 | 5380 days | 1% |
| Steve Waterhouse | 8/10 | 5390 days | 1% |
| Jan Visser | 8/10 | 5405 days | 1% |
| Victoria Purver | 10/10 | 5408 days | 1% |
| Andrew Koster | 9/10 | 5418 days | 1% |
| Emma Edis-Bates | 9/10 | 5421 days | 1% |
| rhubarbsky | 10/10 | 5495 days | 1% |
| krisevelyn | 9/10 | 5709 days | 1% |
| Caitriona Doyle | 10/10 | 5792 days | 1% |
| Hanz | 10/10 | 5794 days | 1% |
| Linley Faulkner | 10/10 | 5798 days | 1% |
| EA Anders | 10/10 | 5815 days | 1% |
| Family van Hessem | 8/10 | 5818 days | 1% |
| Anna | 10/10 | 5868 days | 1% |
| Jessica Clarisse | 10/10 | 5872 days | 1% |
| Christine Suess | 10/10 | 5872 days | 1% |
| LindaV | 8/10 | 6138 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
-4.05% 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 | -3.99% |
| 198 | -4.01% |
| 199 | -4.03% |
| 200 | -4.05% |
| 201 | -4.07% |
| 202 | -4.09% |
| 203 | -4.11% |
| … | … |
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.