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 Rapahoe Beach 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.
Rapahoe Beach Holiday Park
Valid Reviews
94 Valid Reviews
The Rapahoe Beach Holiday Park experience has a total of 96 reviews. There are 94 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 94 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 40 |
|
43% |
| 9/10 | 22 |
|
23% |
| 8/10 | 14 |
|
15% |
| 7/10 | 8 |
|
9% |
| 6/10 | 4 |
|
4% |
| 5/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 4/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 3/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 3 |
|
3% |
85.64% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Rapahoe Beach Holiday Park valid reviews is 85.64% and is based on 94 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
22 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 94 valid reviews, the experience has 22 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 22 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 9/10 | 9 |
|
41% |
| 8/10 | 6 |
|
27% |
| 7/10 | 4 |
|
18% |
| 6/10 | 2 |
|
9% |
| 5/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 1 |
|
5% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
78.18% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Rapahoe Beach Holiday Park face-to-face reviews is 78.18% and is based on 22 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
95.17%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ruth | 10/10 | 16 days | 100% |
| Jorgelina | 10/10 | 46 days | 100% |
| EUNJI | 10/10 | 77 days | 100% |
| John Mitchell | 10/10 | 291 days | 95% |
| Andrew | 10/10 | 319 days | 94% |
| Doug | 10/10 | 319 days | 94% |
| Dora | 10/10 | 350 days | 93% |
| Bruce Ross | 10/10 | 350 days | 93% |
| Jojo&Skoko | 10/10 | 350 days | 93% |
| Franklin | 10/10 | 381 days | 92% |
| Annette McGrath | 7/10 | 411 days | 84% |
| TravelingVan | 10/10 | 442 days | 89% |
| Shenay | 10/10 | 472 days | 87% |
| Sheryl Watson | 9/10 | 625 days | 77% |
| Sally Gillespie | 10/10 | 656 days | 75% |
| Christopher Parker | 10/10 | 656 days | 75% |
| Mike C | 10/10 | 656 days | 75% |
| Ginny | 10/10 | 685 days | 73% |
| velvetmayhem | 9/10 | 716 days | 70% |
| Alex | 9/10 | 716 days | 70% |
| Heledd | 9/10 | 716 days | 70% |
| Tom | 10/10 | 716 days | 71% |
| Wendy | 8/10 | 747 days | 67% |
| Steve Collins | 8/10 | 747 days | 67% |
| Pauline | 10/10 | 747 days | 68% |
| George | 10/10 | 808 days | 63% |
| Chelsea | 10/10 | 808 days | 63% |
| Marie Perret | 9/10 | 808 days | 62% |
| Maria Fidler | 9/10 | 808 days | 62% |
| Mae | 10/10 | 961 days | 48% |
| Corrina Smith | 10/10 | 961 days | 48% |
| Riley | 10/10 | 1022 days | 42% |
| Kate Fairhall | 10/10 | 1050 days | 39% |
| Karen Gilchrist | 10/10 | 1050 days | 39% |
| Dannie | 7/10 | 1081 days | 34% |
| Matt | 8/10 | 1081 days | 36% |
| Jamieson Kohe | 10/10 | 1112 days | 34% |
| K Arnold | 1/10 | 1234 days | 10% |
| Emma | 9/10 | 1752 days | 5% |
| Amber | 9/10 | 1780 days | 5% |
| Jay W | 8/10 | 1964 days | 5% |
| Lena L. | 10/10 | 2117 days | 4% |
| Hannah | 10/10 | 2177 days | 4% |
| Georgie | 10/10 | 2452 days | 4% |
| Mirandah | 8/10 | 2483 days | 4% |
| Sebastian | 10/10 | 2542 days | 4% |
| Moritz | 10/10 | 2573 days | 4% |
| Philip Page | 8/10 | 2664 days | 3% |
| Sandra Day | 1/10 | 2848 days | 1% |
| Wolfgang Sulzer | 5/10 | 3158 days | 2% |
| Andrea Aschenbrenner | 10/10 | 3173 days | 2% |
| Kathy Miller | 9/10 | 3200 days | 2% |
| Johanna Dorner | 9/10 | 3227 days | 2% |
| Annalena Harmeyer | 10/10 | 3237 days | 2% |
| Z H | 1/10 | 3240 days | 1% |
| Rebecca Lindsey | 10/10 | 3271 days | 2% |
| Tracy Ivory | 4/10 | 3302 days | 1% |
| Greg MacFire | 10/10 | 3309 days | 2% |
| Ivan Wee | 8/10 | 3337 days | 2% |
| Ulrich Rix | 8/10 | 3577 days | 2% |
| Ives van Neck | 7/10 | 3600 days | 1% |
| Bianca Nielsen | 10/10 | 3606 days | 2% |
| Philippa and Adam | 6/10 | 3610 days | 1% |
| Manu Hume | 9/10 | 3615 days | 1% |
| Singapore Sling | 6/10 | 3668 days | 1% |
| Tom H | 10/10 | 3943 days | 1% |
| Nicki Rehn | 10/10 | 3960 days | 1% |
| Tim Porter | 9/10 | 4004 days | 1% |
| Helene Andersen | 9/10 | 4304 days | 0% |
| Douglas Dean | 9/10 | 4309 days | 0% |
| Antton Vappula | 9/10 | 4327 days | 0% |
| Michael Turek | 9/10 | 4337 days | 0% |
| Tanje Norton | 10/10 | 4337 days | 0% |
| Sugar Price | 7/10 | 4337 days | 0% |
| Florian Carli | 9/10 | 4368 days | 0% |
| Orla Hughes | 9/10 | 4377 days | 0% |
| Abby Rescr | 7/10 | 4674 days | 1% |
| Frederick Dean | 9/10 | 4674 days | 1% |
| Helen Dean | 9/10 | 4674 days | 1% |
| Joey Mertzig | 9/10 | 4691 days | 1% |
| Henry Howard | 10/10 | 4733 days | 1% |
| Jaap & Susanne | 7/10 | 5048 days | 1% |
| Cindy & Glen Kerunsky | 9/10 | 5055 days | 1% |
| Heini | 8/10 | 5067 days | 1% |
| Fran Williams | 8/10 | 5385 days | 1% |
| Winskowsky | 3/10 | 5407 days | 0% |
| Kuno Eugster | 7/10 | 5413 days | 1% |
| Marleen Meyers | 8/10 | 5416 days | 1% |
| Bob Warne | 7/10 | 5416 days | 1% |
| Irene and Thib Schneider | 6/10 | 5421 days | 1% |
| Patrick Hugener | 8/10 | 5429 days | 1% |
| mikestep | 8/10 | 6104 days | 1% |
| davidne | 8/10 | 6104 days | 1% |
| David_H | 6/10 | 6163 days | 1% |
Adjustments
No Adjustment
Several adjustments to the weighted average may be added to improve relevancy and credibility. Rapahoe Beach Holiday Park does not meet the criteria for any of these adjustments to apply.
Balancing Adjustment
0.42% 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.