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 Christchurch 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.
Christchurch Tasman Holiday Parks
Valid Reviews
136 Valid Reviews
The Christchurch Tasman Holiday Parks experience has a total of 138 reviews. There are 136 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 136 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 17 |
|
13% |
| 9/10 | 30 |
|
22% |
| 8/10 | 35 |
|
26% |
| 7/10 | 22 |
|
16% |
| 6/10 | 15 |
|
11% |
| 5/10 | 8 |
|
6% |
| 4/10 | 3 |
|
2% |
| 3/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
| 2/10 | 2 |
|
1% |
| 1/10 | 3 |
|
2% |
75.44% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Christchurch Tasman Holiday Parks valid reviews is 75.44% and is based on 136 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
75 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 136 valid reviews, the experience has 75 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 75 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 12 |
|
16% |
| 9/10 | 16 |
|
21% |
| 8/10 | 20 |
|
27% |
| 7/10 | 14 |
|
19% |
| 6/10 | 7 |
|
9% |
| 5/10 | 4 |
|
5% |
| 4/10 | 2 |
|
3% |
| 3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
78.93% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Christchurch Tasman Holiday Parks face-to-face reviews is 78.93% and is based on 75 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
77.80%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mark B | 10/10 | 310 days | 100% |
| RM | 3/10 | 372 days | 53% |
| Aoife | 9/10 | 433 days | 94% |
| Matt H | 8/10 | 891 days | 57% |
| Judy | 10/10 | 952 days | 51% |
| Miemil | 1/10 | 952 days | 21% |
| Stephanie | 1/10 | 1041 days | 17% |
| Jouke | 9/10 | 1133 days | 34% |
| Felix | 7/10 | 1802 days | 5% |
| Andrew Hammond | 8/10 | 2290 days | 4% |
| Lisanne | 4/10 | 2413 days | 3% |
| Kate | 7/10 | 2413 days | 4% |
| Beth | 9/10 | 2502 days | 4% |
| Regina | 8/10 | 2533 days | 4% |
| Angela | 8/10 | 2625 days | 4% |
| Ray Tombs | 9/10 | 2808 days | 3% |
| Michael McMahon | 10/10 | 2808 days | 3% |
| Shira LA | 9/10 | 2867 days | 3% |
| Claire Hodges | 6/10 | 2877 days | 3% |
| Alecsandra Dimofte | 6/10 | 2911 days | 3% |
| Emilie Krasowski | 8/10 | 2917 days | 3% |
| Gary Prescot | 7/10 | 2992 days | 3% |
| Vanessa Stubbs | 8/10 | 3016 days | 3% |
| c mccabe | 8/10 | 3051 days | 3% |
| Chris Nugent | 6/10 | 3134 days | 2% |
| Francis Williams | 9/10 | 3247 days | 2% |
| Luke Young | 9/10 | 3407 days | 2% |
| Aaron Gunning | 5/10 | 3565 days | 1% |
| Jane Louise Stokes | 9/10 | 3583 days | 2% |
| Glinys Weller | 9/10 | 3609 days | 2% |
| Jean marc Daubenfeld | 8/10 | 3623 days | 1% |
| Dennis Biedermann | 5/10 | 3720 days | 1% |
| Melissa Darlington | 10/10 | 3726 days | 1% |
| Stephanie | 9/10 | 3862 days | 1% |
| Erica b | 5/10 | 3903 days | 1% |
| Sam Smith | 8/10 | 3934 days | 1% |
| Andrew Cruickshank | 9/10 | 3934 days | 1% |
| Nonrev | 8/10 | 3962 days | 1% |
| Nina Müller | 6/10 | 3962 days | 1% |
| Kim Frey | 6/10 | 3998 days | 1% |
| Bjorn Privat | 2/10 | 4016 days | 0% |
| neil holdaway | 6/10 | 4024 days | 1% |
| Jacques Revel | 6/10 | 4270 days | 0% |
| Matusala Habtemariam | 8/10 | 4324 days | 0% |
| B D | 6/10 | 4328 days | 0% |
| sreve | 6/10 | 4358 days | 0% |
| Andrew Cattanach | 6/10 | 4359 days | 0% |
| GARRYBLOWER | 9/10 | 4390 days | 1% |
| Alan Blackburn | 7/10 | 4390 days | 1% |
| PipandJon | 5/10 | 4420 days | 1% |
| Stewart Littleford | 9/10 | 4481 days | 1% |
| Grantygrant | 7/10 | 4634 days | 1% |
| ramy | 2/10 | 4634 days | 0% |
| Patrycja Polakowska | 8/10 | 4675 days | 1% |
| Willem de Jong | 9/10 | 4686 days | 1% |
| Michael Nolan | 8/10 | 4693 days | 1% |
| Stripeyfish | 1/10 | 4724 days | 0% |
| Rob | 6/10 | 4741 days | 1% |
| Fred and Carin | 6/10 | 4744 days | 1% |
| Urs Kloter | 9/10 | 4746 days | 1% |
| Toby Clark | 9/10 | 5022 days | 1% |
| launch | 7/10 | 5030 days | 1% |
| Richard and Janet | 7/10 | 5033 days | 1% |
| Jeltje | 6/10 | 5039 days | 1% |
| Josef | 7/10 | 5040 days | 1% |
| Jim Addicott | 4/10 | 5043 days | 1% |
| Jim Delacruz | 8/10 | 5045 days | 1% |
| Horst Langstein | 8/10 | 5052 days | 1% |
| Frank Krivauek | 5/10 | 5053 days | 1% |
| Thyg Lingdal | 9/10 | 5058 days | 1% |
| Colin Jenkins | 7/10 | 5070 days | 1% |
| Herbert | 9/10 | 5072 days | 1% |
| Jackie & Ray | 10/10 | 5072 days | 1% |
| Fred Saunders | 10/10 | 5085 days | 1% |
| CMJ | 8/10 | 5090 days | 1% |
| Harry Simpson | 6/10 | 5128 days | 1% |
| Ruth & Derrick | 6/10 | 5134 days | 1% |
| Peter Spooner | 9/10 | 5138 days | 1% |
| Tamara | 8/10 | 5151 days | 1% |
| Jason Ritenour | 8/10 | 5212 days | 1% |
| qofd | 8/10 | 5335 days | 1% |
| Ilse & Thys | 7/10 | 5379 days | 1% |
| Victoria Boolsen | 10/10 | 5388 days | 1% |
| Malin Emanuelsson | 8/10 | 5399 days | 1% |
| Brian Clothier | 10/10 | 5400 days | 1% |
| D Hoekstra | 8/10 | 5419 days | 1% |
| Gerry Nichols | 9/10 | 5419 days | 1% |
| Mr & Mrs Winter | 9/10 | 5419 days | 1% |
| H Schepers | 8/10 | 5420 days | 1% |
| hendrik king | 7/10 | 5455 days | 1% |
| Mikeminch | 8/10 | 5486 days | 1% |
| kristy | 9/10 | 5547 days | 1% |
| Andrew Hammond | 9/10 | 5547 days | 1% |
| Zac Morris | 10/10 | 5577 days | 1% |
| Don & Geraldine | 7/10 | 5736 days | 1% |
| Brett & Tanille | 10/10 | 5749 days | 1% |
| Janny en Bert | 8/10 | 5751 days | 1% |
| Westermann | 4/10 | 5752 days | 1% |
| Shirley C | 8/10 | 5753 days | 1% |
| Pam Know | 5/10 | 5756 days | 1% |
| Colin Daniels | 5/10 | 5763 days | 1% |
| Janny Meerdinnk Veldboow | 8/10 | 5767 days | 1% |
| Bert Tonwen | 8/10 | 5770 days | 1% |
| Dale King | 7/10 | 5770 days | 1% |
| Dieter Groscurth | 8/10 | 5771 days | 1% |
| Gordon and Joyce | 10/10 | 5771 days | 1% |
| Yona | 7/10 | 5775 days | 1% |
| Pascal Auber | 10/10 | 5775 days | 1% |
| Silvia Kern | 9/10 | 5783 days | 1% |
| R Gilge | 9/10 | 5785 days | 1% |
| Nicole | 9/10 | 5786 days | 1% |
| Frances Hay | 7/10 | 5788 days | 1% |
| Paul Frew | 7/10 | 5798 days | 1% |
| Catherine Clavel | 7/10 | 5798 days | 1% |
| John J | 8/10 | 5803 days | 1% |
| Heino keyssler | 10/10 | 5809 days | 1% |
| middendorp | 8/10 | 5835 days | 1% |
| Robbertsen | 7/10 | 5843 days | 1% |
| Kirsty McGrath | 8/10 | 5855 days | 1% |
| Simon Bartholomew | 9/10 | 5863 days | 1% |
| Daniel Alonso | 10/10 | 5863 days | 1% |
| Ana Garcia | 10/10 | 5864 days | 1% |
| X Neils | 8/10 | 5873 days | 1% |
| Emily and Alex | 8/10 | 5878 days | 1% |
| PatH | 10/10 | 5895 days | 1% |
| Kazmeister | 7/10 | 6034 days | 1% |
| Johnnie | 8/10 | 6076 days | 1% |
| RussC | 7/10 | 6087 days | 1% |
| SteveB | 5/10 | 6095 days | 1% |
| Becca1 | 10/10 | 6097 days | 1% |
| RonB | 7/10 | 6107 days | 1% |
| Christine | 8/10 | 6108 days | 1% |
| LucyPoland | 9/10 | 6115 days | 1% |
| Suzie Lechner | 9/10 | 6115 days | 1% |
| ChrisWeb | 7/10 | 6129 days | 1% |
| VolkerS | 9/10 | 6129 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 Christchurch Tasman Holiday Parks 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 Christchurch 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 Christchurch Tasman Holiday Parks 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
5.17% 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
79%
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.