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 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
134 Valid Reviews
The Christchurch Tasman Holiday Parks experience has a total of 136 reviews. There are 134 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 134 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 16 |
|
12% |
| 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 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 2/10 | 2 |
|
1% |
| 1/10 | 3 |
|
2% |
75.60% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Christchurch Tasman Holiday Parks valid reviews is 75.60% and is based on 134 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 134 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
77.26%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aoife | 9/10 | 54 days | 100% |
| Matt H | 8/10 | 512 days | 84% |
| Judy | 10/10 | 573 days | 82% |
| Miemil | 1/10 | 573 days | 33% |
| Stephanie | 1/10 | 662 days | 31% |
| Jouke | 9/10 | 754 days | 68% |
| Felix | 7/10 | 1423 days | 13% |
| Andrew Hammond | 8/10 | 1911 days | 5% |
| Lisanne | 4/10 | 2034 days | 3% |
| Kate | 7/10 | 2034 days | 4% |
| Beth | 9/10 | 2123 days | 4% |
| Regina | 8/10 | 2154 days | 4% |
| Angela | 8/10 | 2246 days | 4% |
| Ray Tombs | 9/10 | 2429 days | 4% |
| Michael McMahon | 10/10 | 2429 days | 4% |
| Shira LA | 9/10 | 2488 days | 4% |
| Claire Hodges | 6/10 | 2498 days | 3% |
| Alecsandra Dimofte | 6/10 | 2532 days | 3% |
| Emilie Krasowski | 8/10 | 2538 days | 4% |
| Gary Prescot | 7/10 | 2613 days | 3% |
| Vanessa Stubbs | 8/10 | 2637 days | 3% |
| c mccabe | 8/10 | 2672 days | 3% |
| Chris Nugent | 6/10 | 2755 days | 3% |
| Francis Williams | 9/10 | 2868 days | 3% |
| Luke Young | 9/10 | 3028 days | 3% |
| Aaron Gunning | 5/10 | 3186 days | 2% |
| Jane Louise Stokes | 9/10 | 3204 days | 2% |
| Glinys Weller | 9/10 | 3230 days | 2% |
| Jean marc Daubenfeld | 8/10 | 3244 days | 2% |
| Dennis Biedermann | 5/10 | 3341 days | 2% |
| Melissa Darlington | 10/10 | 3347 days | 2% |
| Stephanie | 9/10 | 3483 days | 2% |
| Erica b | 5/10 | 3525 days | 1% |
| Sam Smith | 8/10 | 3556 days | 2% |
| Andrew Cruickshank | 9/10 | 3556 days | 2% |
| Nonrev | 8/10 | 3584 days | 2% |
| Nina Müller | 6/10 | 3584 days | 1% |
| Kim Frey | 6/10 | 3619 days | 1% |
| Bjorn Privat | 2/10 | 3637 days | 1% |
| neil holdaway | 6/10 | 3646 days | 1% |
| Jacques Revel | 6/10 | 3891 days | 1% |
| Matusala Habtemariam | 8/10 | 3945 days | 1% |
| B D | 6/10 | 3949 days | 1% |
| sreve | 6/10 | 3980 days | 1% |
| Andrew Cattanach | 6/10 | 3980 days | 1% |
| GARRYBLOWER | 9/10 | 4011 days | 1% |
| Alan Blackburn | 7/10 | 4011 days | 1% |
| PipandJon | 5/10 | 4041 days | 0% |
| Stewart Littleford | 9/10 | 4102 days | 1% |
| Grantygrant | 7/10 | 4255 days | 0% |
| ramy | 2/10 | 4255 days | 0% |
| Patrycja Polakowska | 8/10 | 4296 days | 0% |
| Willem de Jong | 9/10 | 4307 days | 0% |
| Michael Nolan | 8/10 | 4314 days | 0% |
| Stripeyfish | 1/10 | 4345 days | 0% |
| Rob | 6/10 | 4362 days | 0% |
| Fred and Carin | 6/10 | 4365 days | 0% |
| Urs Kloter | 9/10 | 4367 days | 0% |
| Toby Clark | 9/10 | 4643 days | 1% |
| launch | 7/10 | 4651 days | 1% |
| Richard and Janet | 7/10 | 4654 days | 1% |
| Jeltje | 6/10 | 4660 days | 1% |
| Josef | 7/10 | 4661 days | 1% |
| Jim Addicott | 4/10 | 4664 days | 1% |
| Jim Delacruz | 8/10 | 4666 days | 1% |
| Horst Langstein | 8/10 | 4673 days | 1% |
| Frank Krivauek | 5/10 | 4674 days | 1% |
| Thyg Lingdal | 9/10 | 4679 days | 1% |
| Colin Jenkins | 7/10 | 4691 days | 1% |
| Herbert | 9/10 | 4693 days | 1% |
| Jackie & Ray | 10/10 | 4693 days | 1% |
| Fred Saunders | 10/10 | 4706 days | 1% |
| CMJ | 8/10 | 4711 days | 1% |
| Harry Simpson | 6/10 | 4749 days | 1% |
| Ruth & Derrick | 6/10 | 4755 days | 1% |
| Peter Spooner | 9/10 | 4759 days | 1% |
| Tamara | 8/10 | 4772 days | 1% |
| Jason Ritenour | 8/10 | 4833 days | 1% |
| qofd | 8/10 | 4956 days | 1% |
| Ilse & Thys | 7/10 | 5000 days | 1% |
| Victoria Boolsen | 10/10 | 5009 days | 1% |
| Malin Emanuelsson | 8/10 | 5020 days | 1% |
| Brian Clothier | 10/10 | 5021 days | 1% |
| D Hoekstra | 8/10 | 5040 days | 1% |
| Gerry Nichols | 9/10 | 5040 days | 1% |
| Mr & Mrs Winter | 9/10 | 5040 days | 1% |
| H Schepers | 8/10 | 5041 days | 1% |
| hendrik king | 7/10 | 5076 days | 1% |
| Mikeminch | 8/10 | 5107 days | 1% |
| kristy | 9/10 | 5168 days | 1% |
| Andrew Hammond | 9/10 | 5168 days | 1% |
| Zac Morris | 10/10 | 5198 days | 1% |
| Don & Geraldine | 7/10 | 5357 days | 1% |
| Brett & Tanille | 10/10 | 5370 days | 1% |
| Janny en Bert | 8/10 | 5372 days | 1% |
| Westermann | 4/10 | 5373 days | 1% |
| Shirley C | 8/10 | 5374 days | 1% |
| Pam Know | 5/10 | 5377 days | 1% |
| Colin Daniels | 5/10 | 5384 days | 1% |
| Janny Meerdinnk Veldboow | 8/10 | 5388 days | 1% |
| Bert Tonwen | 8/10 | 5391 days | 1% |
| Dale King | 7/10 | 5391 days | 1% |
| Dieter Groscurth | 8/10 | 5392 days | 1% |
| Gordon and Joyce | 10/10 | 5392 days | 1% |
| Yona | 7/10 | 5396 days | 1% |
| Pascal Auber | 10/10 | 5396 days | 1% |
| Silvia Kern | 9/10 | 5404 days | 1% |
| R Gilge | 9/10 | 5406 days | 1% |
| Nicole | 9/10 | 5407 days | 1% |
| Frances Hay | 7/10 | 5409 days | 1% |
| Paul Frew | 7/10 | 5419 days | 1% |
| Catherine Clavel | 7/10 | 5419 days | 1% |
| John J | 8/10 | 5424 days | 1% |
| Heino keyssler | 10/10 | 5430 days | 1% |
| middendorp | 8/10 | 5456 days | 1% |
| Robbertsen | 7/10 | 5464 days | 1% |
| Kirsty McGrath | 8/10 | 5476 days | 1% |
| Simon Bartholomew | 9/10 | 5484 days | 1% |
| Daniel Alonso | 10/10 | 5484 days | 1% |
| Ana Garcia | 10/10 | 5485 days | 1% |
| X Neils | 8/10 | 5494 days | 1% |
| Emily and Alex | 8/10 | 5499 days | 1% |
| PatH | 10/10 | 5516 days | 1% |
| Kazmeister | 7/10 | 5655 days | 1% |
| Johnnie | 8/10 | 5697 days | 1% |
| RussC | 7/10 | 5708 days | 1% |
| SteveB | 5/10 | 5716 days | 1% |
| Becca1 | 10/10 | 5718 days | 1% |
| RonB | 7/10 | 5728 days | 1% |
| Christine | 8/10 | 5729 days | 1% |
| LucyPoland | 9/10 | 5736 days | 1% |
| Suzie Lechner | 9/10 | 5736 days | 1% |
| ChrisWeb | 7/10 | 5750 days | 1% |
| VolkerS | 9/10 | 5750 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
-0.89% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 43 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 44 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 41 | -0.83% |
| 42 | -0.85% |
| 43 | -0.87% |
| 44 | -0.89% |
| 45 | -0.91% |
| 46 | -0.93% |
| 47 | -0.95% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
4.14% 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
81%
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.