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 Portobello Village Tourist 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.
Portobello Village Tourist Park
Valid Reviews
112 Valid Reviews
The Portobello Village Tourist Park experience has a total of 112 valid reviews. There are no 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 112 valid reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 15 |
|
13% |
| 9/10 | 25 |
|
22% |
| 8/10 | 34 |
|
30% |
| 7/10 | 18 |
|
16% |
| 6/10 | 14 |
|
13% |
| 5/10 | 3 |
|
3% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 2 |
|
2% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
78.48% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Portobello Village Tourist Park valid reviews is 78.48% and is based on 112 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
30 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 112 valid reviews, the experience has 30 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 30 face-to-face reviews:
| Rating | Count | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/10 | 6 |
|
20% |
| 9/10 | 7 |
|
23% |
| 8/10 | 9 |
|
30% |
| 7/10 | 3 |
|
10% |
| 6/10 | 3 |
|
10% |
| 5/10 | 1 |
|
3% |
| 4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 3/10 | 1 |
|
3% |
| 2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
| 1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
80.67% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the Portobello Village Tourist Park face-to-face reviews is 80.67% and is based on 30 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
Weighted Average
81.36%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Paul | 8/10 | 71 days | 100% |
| Rich | 7/10 | 163 days | 94% |
| Eline | 6/10 | 254 days | 85% |
| Laurie | 9/10 | 285 days | 97% |
| Hannah | 10/10 | 313 days | 97% |
| Shaun | 10/10 | 313 days | 97% |
| Anne | 8/10 | 344 days | 94% |
| Fredrik | 6/10 | 344 days | 82% |
| Nicolas | 7/10 | 436 days | 85% |
| Hayley | 9/10 | 497 days | 87% |
| Lindsay Byrnes | 8/10 | 619 days | 78% |
| Fabienne | 8/10 | 650 days | 76% |
| Ian Garcia | 8/10 | 679 days | 74% |
| Tine Warner | 9/10 | 710 days | 72% |
| Joel Fryett | 6/10 | 710 days | 63% |
| Loam | 6/10 | 710 days | 63% |
| M.K. | 9/10 | 802 days | 64% |
| Ryli West | 8/10 | 985 days | 45% |
| Steve | 9/10 | 1016 days | 43% |
| Jake | 10/10 | 1044 days | 41% |
| Arie | 7/10 | 1075 days | 35% |
| Julia | 9/10 | 1106 days | 35% |
| Debby | 9/10 | 1136 days | 32% |
| Lothar Valentijn | 10/10 | 1136 days | 33% |
| Sarah | 9/10 | 1136 days | 32% |
| Colin | 8/10 | 1167 days | 30% |
| Lisa | 10/10 | 1289 days | 22% |
| Anne S | 9/10 | 1381 days | 16% |
| Ana and Rob | 8/10 | 1958 days | 5% |
| Sandy | 9/10 | 1989 days | 5% |
| Maria | 6/10 | 2111 days | 4% |
| M&P | 8/10 | 2140 days | 4% |
| Tom Z. | 9/10 | 2171 days | 4% |
| Tea | 8/10 | 2202 days | 4% |
| Sue W | 8/10 | 2232 days | 4% |
| Maryline | 9/10 | 2446 days | 4% |
| Esa | 7/10 | 2477 days | 4% |
| Vincent | 9/10 | 2477 days | 4% |
| TP&MM | 8/10 | 2477 days | 4% |
| Chantal | 10/10 | 2567 days | 4% |
| James & Kerry | 9/10 | 2597 days | 4% |
| Melinda Pyke | 8/10 | 2658 days | 3% |
| Grizzly Girl | 8/10 | 2658 days | 3% |
| Esteban | 8/10 | 2811 days | 3% |
| Bridget Cumming | 7/10 | 2849 days | 3% |
| M A Pelton | 10/10 | 2852 days | 3% |
| UK 50-something couple | 8/10 | 2870 days | 3% |
| Suzanne Wijsman | 9/10 | 2878 days | 3% |
| Sandra Jeffers | 6/10 | 2978 days | 2% |
| Howard Morris | 8/10 | 2994 days | 3% |
| Geoff Steele | 7/10 | 3023 days | 2% |
| Matthias Wohlgemuth | 7/10 | 3249 days | 2% |
| sara hoeflaken | 8/10 | 3263 days | 2% |
| Roeland Driessen | 8/10 | 3266 days | 2% |
| Cyrielle Vallat | 6/10 | 3321 days | 2% |
| Susan H | 10/10 | 3360 days | 2% |
| Ruth Hernandez | 8/10 | 3362 days | 2% |
| Kate | 8/10 | 3495 days | 2% |
| Joanna du Toit | 7/10 | 3652 days | 1% |
| Yvonne Wu | 8/10 | 3877 days | 1% |
| Soizic Vandermeersch | 7/10 | 3899 days | 1% |
| Rossco | 6/10 | 3907 days | 1% |
| Erica b | 7/10 | 3907 days | 1% |
| Larry Dashiell | 9/10 | 3938 days | 1% |
| June Harris | 6/10 | 3997 days | 1% |
| Matthias Thorn | 7/10 | 3997 days | 1% |
| Richard | 8/10 | 4181 days | 0% |
| travelscot | 9/10 | 4242 days | 0% |
| Patricia Revel | 9/10 | 4273 days | 0% |
| Katarina | 10/10 | 4274 days | 0% |
| Gillian Scott | 7/10 | 4301 days | 0% |
| Julie Robinson | 7/10 | 4318 days | 0% |
| Julien de la lande | 6/10 | 4344 days | 0% |
| Wouter Bosch | 7/10 | 4344 days | 0% |
| Aude Moulin | 5/10 | 4344 days | 0% |
| Maya Bakker-deDreu | 8/10 | 4352 days | 0% |
| JoMary Smith | 8/10 | 4362 days | 0% |
| 2 tent travelers from Montreal | 5/10 | 4393 days | 1% |
| Grantygrant | 7/10 | 4637 days | 1% |
| Bertiethebus | 8/10 | 4668 days | 1% |
| Kadyan | 6/10 | 4668 days | 1% |
| Malgorzata | 6/10 | 4672 days | 1% |
| Moni Sangoi | 7/10 | 4696 days | 1% |
| Puma17 | 7/10 | 4727 days | 1% |
| David | 5/10 | 4727 days | 1% |
| Auger | 10/10 | 4765 days | 1% |
| Auger | 10/10 | 4765 days | 1% |
| Mike & Jennie | 8/10 | 5044 days | 1% |
| Balonno | 3/10 | 5093 days | 1% |
| lydzb | 6/10 | 5124 days | 1% |
| ncopas | 1/10 | 5124 days | 0% |
| Annie Breton | 6/10 | 5382 days | 1% |
| Robin Smith | 10/10 | 5385 days | 1% |
| Jim & Rebecca | 9/10 | 5391 days | 1% |
| Tony & Marina Greenaway | 8/10 | 5392 days | 1% |
| Chris | 8/10 | 5393 days | 1% |
| LandJ | 9/10 | 5399 days | 1% |
| Manfred & Gabi | 9/10 | 5410 days | 1% |
| Frank Lehe | 8/10 | 5412 days | 1% |
| Marieke and Bert-Jan | 8/10 | 5415 days | 1% |
| Roy Seymour | 8/10 | 5418 days | 1% |
| Sabine | 9/10 | 5677 days | 1% |
| Anna | 9/10 | 5682 days | 1% |
| Siebels Wilke | 8/10 | 5696 days | 1% |
| Peter Aerborg | 9/10 | 5700 days | 1% |
| Peter Brown | 10/10 | 5760 days | 1% |
| John Cox | 8/10 | 5770 days | 1% |
| Helmet Paula | 3/10 | 5777 days | 0% |
| Lorena | 10/10 | 5792 days | 1% |
| Alexis De Wilde | 9/10 | 5864 days | 1% |
| Decuq | 7/10 | 5865 days | 1% |
| Vivien Williams | 10/10 | 6116 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 Portobello Village Tourist Park experience has plenty of reviews and does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
Recent Reviews Adjustment
-0.85% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 42 days. However the Portobello Village Tourist 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 Portobello Village Tourist Park experience has been adjusted for 42 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
| Days | Adjustment |
|---|---|
| … | … |
| 39 | -0.79% |
| 40 | -0.81% |
| 41 | -0.83% |
| 42 | -0.85% |
| 43 | -0.87% |
| 44 | -0.89% |
| 45 | -0.91% |
| … | … |
Balancing Adjustment
2.86% 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
83%
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.