Kia ora, 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
77.04%
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 | 34 days | 100% |
| RM | 3/10 | 96 days | 54% |
| Aoife | 9/10 | 157 days | 98% |
| Matt H | 8/10 | 614 days | 77% |
| Judy | 10/10 | 675 days | 74% |
| Miemil | 1/10 | 675 days | 30% |
| Stephanie | 1/10 | 765 days | 27% |
| Jouke | 9/10 | 857 days | 58% |
| Felix | 7/10 | 1526 days | 9% |
| Andrew Hammond | 8/10 | 2013 days | 5% |
| Lisanne | 4/10 | 2136 days | 3% |
| Kate | 7/10 | 2136 days | 4% |
| Beth | 9/10 | 2226 days | 4% |
| Regina | 8/10 | 2257 days | 4% |
| Angela | 8/10 | 2349 days | 4% |
| Ray Tombs | 9/10 | 2532 days | 4% |
| Michael McMahon | 10/10 | 2532 days | 4% |
| Shira LA | 9/10 | 2591 days | 3% |
| Claire Hodges | 6/10 | 2601 days | 3% |
| Alecsandra Dimofte | 6/10 | 2635 days | 3% |
| Emilie Krasowski | 8/10 | 2641 days | 3% |
| Gary Prescot | 7/10 | 2716 days | 3% |
| Vanessa Stubbs | 8/10 | 2739 days | 3% |
| c mccabe | 8/10 | 2774 days | 3% |
| Chris Nugent | 6/10 | 2857 days | 3% |
| Francis Williams | 9/10 | 2971 days | 3% |
| Luke Young | 9/10 | 3130 days | 2% |
| Aaron Gunning | 5/10 | 3289 days | 2% |
| Jane Louise Stokes | 9/10 | 3307 days | 2% |
| Glinys Weller | 9/10 | 3333 days | 2% |
| Jean marc Daubenfeld | 8/10 | 3347 days | 2% |
| Dennis Biedermann | 5/10 | 3444 days | 1% |
| Melissa Darlington | 10/10 | 3449 days | 2% |
| Stephanie | 9/10 | 3585 days | 2% |
| Erica b | 5/10 | 3627 days | 1% |
| Sam Smith | 8/10 | 3658 days | 1% |
| Andrew Cruickshank | 9/10 | 3658 days | 1% |
| Nonrev | 8/10 | 3686 days | 1% |
| Nina Müller | 6/10 | 3686 days | 1% |
| Kim Frey | 6/10 | 3722 days | 1% |
| Bjorn Privat | 2/10 | 3740 days | 1% |
| neil holdaway | 6/10 | 3748 days | 1% |
| Jacques Revel | 6/10 | 3994 days | 1% |
| Matusala Habtemariam | 8/10 | 4048 days | 1% |
| B D | 6/10 | 4052 days | 1% |
| sreve | 6/10 | 4082 days | 0% |
| Andrew Cattanach | 6/10 | 4083 days | 0% |
| GARRYBLOWER | 9/10 | 4114 days | 0% |
| Alan Blackburn | 7/10 | 4114 days | 0% |
| PipandJon | 5/10 | 4144 days | 0% |
| Stewart Littleford | 9/10 | 4204 days | 0% |
| Grantygrant | 7/10 | 4358 days | 0% |
| ramy | 2/10 | 4358 days | 0% |
| Patrycja Polakowska | 8/10 | 4399 days | 1% |
| Willem de Jong | 9/10 | 4410 days | 1% |
| Michael Nolan | 8/10 | 4417 days | 1% |
| Stripeyfish | 1/10 | 4448 days | 0% |
| Rob | 6/10 | 4465 days | 1% |
| Fred and Carin | 6/10 | 4468 days | 1% |
| Urs Kloter | 9/10 | 4470 days | 1% |
| Toby Clark | 9/10 | 4746 days | 1% |
| launch | 7/10 | 4754 days | 1% |
| Richard and Janet | 7/10 | 4757 days | 1% |
| Jeltje | 6/10 | 4763 days | 1% |
| Josef | 7/10 | 4764 days | 1% |
| Jim Addicott | 4/10 | 4767 days | 1% |
| Jim Delacruz | 8/10 | 4769 days | 1% |
| Horst Langstein | 8/10 | 4776 days | 1% |
| Frank Krivauek | 5/10 | 4777 days | 1% |
| Thyg Lingdal | 9/10 | 4782 days | 1% |
| Colin Jenkins | 7/10 | 4794 days | 1% |
| Herbert | 9/10 | 4796 days | 1% |
| Jackie & Ray | 10/10 | 4796 days | 1% |
| Fred Saunders | 10/10 | 4809 days | 1% |
| CMJ | 8/10 | 4814 days | 1% |
| Harry Simpson | 6/10 | 4852 days | 1% |
| Ruth & Derrick | 6/10 | 4858 days | 1% |
| Peter Spooner | 9/10 | 4862 days | 1% |
| Tamara | 8/10 | 4875 days | 1% |
| Jason Ritenour | 8/10 | 4935 days | 1% |
| qofd | 8/10 | 5058 days | 1% |
| Ilse & Thys | 7/10 | 5103 days | 1% |
| Victoria Boolsen | 10/10 | 5112 days | 1% |
| Malin Emanuelsson | 8/10 | 5123 days | 1% |
| Brian Clothier | 10/10 | 5124 days | 1% |
| D Hoekstra | 8/10 | 5143 days | 1% |
| Gerry Nichols | 9/10 | 5143 days | 1% |
| Mr & Mrs Winter | 9/10 | 5143 days | 1% |
| H Schepers | 8/10 | 5144 days | 1% |
| hendrik king | 7/10 | 5179 days | 1% |
| Mikeminch | 8/10 | 5210 days | 1% |
| kristy | 9/10 | 5271 days | 1% |
| Andrew Hammond | 9/10 | 5271 days | 1% |
| Zac Morris | 10/10 | 5300 days | 1% |
| Don & Geraldine | 7/10 | 5460 days | 1% |
| Brett & Tanille | 10/10 | 5473 days | 1% |
| Janny en Bert | 8/10 | 5475 days | 1% |
| Westermann | 4/10 | 5476 days | 1% |
| Shirley C | 8/10 | 5477 days | 1% |
| Pam Know | 5/10 | 5480 days | 1% |
| Colin Daniels | 5/10 | 5487 days | 1% |
| Janny Meerdinnk Veldboow | 8/10 | 5491 days | 1% |
| Bert Tonwen | 8/10 | 5494 days | 1% |
| Dale King | 7/10 | 5494 days | 1% |
| Dieter Groscurth | 8/10 | 5495 days | 1% |
| Gordon and Joyce | 10/10 | 5495 days | 1% |
| Yona | 7/10 | 5499 days | 1% |
| Pascal Auber | 10/10 | 5499 days | 1% |
| Silvia Kern | 9/10 | 5507 days | 1% |
| R Gilge | 9/10 | 5509 days | 1% |
| Nicole | 9/10 | 5510 days | 1% |
| Frances Hay | 7/10 | 5512 days | 1% |
| Paul Frew | 7/10 | 5522 days | 1% |
| Catherine Clavel | 7/10 | 5522 days | 1% |
| John J | 8/10 | 5527 days | 1% |
| Heino keyssler | 10/10 | 5533 days | 1% |
| middendorp | 8/10 | 5559 days | 1% |
| Robbertsen | 7/10 | 5567 days | 1% |
| Kirsty McGrath | 8/10 | 5579 days | 1% |
| Simon Bartholomew | 9/10 | 5587 days | 1% |
| Daniel Alonso | 10/10 | 5587 days | 1% |
| Ana Garcia | 10/10 | 5588 days | 1% |
| X Neils | 8/10 | 5597 days | 1% |
| Emily and Alex | 8/10 | 5602 days | 1% |
| PatH | 10/10 | 5619 days | 1% |
| Kazmeister | 7/10 | 5757 days | 1% |
| Johnnie | 8/10 | 5799 days | 1% |
| RussC | 7/10 | 5810 days | 1% |
| SteveB | 5/10 | 5819 days | 1% |
| Becca1 | 10/10 | 5821 days | 1% |
| RonB | 7/10 | 5831 days | 1% |
| Christine | 8/10 | 5832 days | 1% |
| LucyPoland | 9/10 | 5839 days | 1% |
| Suzie Lechner | 9/10 | 5839 days | 1% |
| ChrisWeb | 7/10 | 5853 days | 1% |
| VolkerS | 9/10 | 5853 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
-0.20% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 56 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 10 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 7 | -0.14% |
| 8 | -0.16% |
| 9 | -0.18% |
| 10 | -0.20% |
| 11 | -0.22% |
| 12 | -0.24% |
| 13 | -0.26% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
3.97% 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.