Hey, 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 The Camp.
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.
106 Valid Reviews
The The Camp experience has a total of 111 reviews. There are 106 valid reviews that are included when calculating the ranking score and 5 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 106 valid reviews:
Rating | Count | Percentage | |
---|---|---|---|
10/10 | 36 |
|
34% |
9/10 | 25 |
|
24% |
8/10 | 20 |
|
19% |
7/10 | 10 |
|
9% |
6/10 | 2 |
|
2% |
5/10 | 5 |
|
5% |
4/10 | 3 |
|
3% |
3/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
2/10 | 1 |
|
1% |
1/10 | 3 |
|
3% |
82.26% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the The Camp valid reviews is 82.26% and is based on 106 valid reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here as a comparison to the weighted average.
25 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 106 valid reviews, the experience has 25 face-to-face reviews collected during interviews by our team.
Below is the distribution of ratings for the 25 face-to-face reviews:
Rating | Count | Percentage | |
---|---|---|---|
10/10 | 7 |
|
28% |
9/10 | 8 |
|
32% |
8/10 | 5 |
|
20% |
7/10 | 3 |
|
12% |
6/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
5/10 | 2 |
|
8% |
4/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
3/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
2/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
1/10 | 0 |
|
0% |
85.20% Average
The raw data average (mean) for all the The Camp face-to-face reviews is 85.20% and is based on 25 face-to-face reviews. This value is not used to calculate the ranking score and it only provided here for comparison purposes.
79.62%
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 |
---|---|---|---|
Simon | 9/10 | 39 days | 99% |
VamperCan | 10/10 | 39 days | 100% |
Jess Cullen | 4/10 | 39 days | 65% |
Laura | 10/10 | 39 days | 100% |
Brent | 9/10 | 131 days | 98% |
Cath | 9/10 | 162 days | 98% |
Marley | 4/10 | 315 days | 62% |
Anouk | 1/10 | 467 days | 36% |
Marie Perret | 7/10 | 528 days | 78% |
Katie Edser | 10/10 | 742 days | 69% |
Mathieu Lempereur | 10/10 | 770 days | 66% |
RR | 4/10 | 832 days | 40% |
Jolu | 1/10 | 832 days | 25% |
Jenna | 10/10 | 1197 days | 27% |
Stef | 9/10 | 1472 days | 12% |
Chelsea F | 10/10 | 1500 days | 11% |
ZMad | 9/10 | 1562 days | 9% |
Dan | 8/10 | 1592 days | 8% |
Anna Swain | 7/10 | 1745 days | 5% |
Jenny and Barry | 9/10 | 2019 days | 5% |
Vicki Hoskinson | 10/10 | 2203 days | 4% |
Pedro | 10/10 | 2231 days | 4% |
Richard | 7/10 | 2262 days | 4% |
Matho31 | 1/10 | 2293 days | 2% |
Ellie | 10/10 | 2476 days | 4% |
Jack James | 8/10 | 2654 days | 3% |
Tammy Schein | 8/10 | 2688 days | 3% |
Wen Xin Tan | 9/10 | 2769 days | 3% |
Belinda Clarke | 7/10 | 2906 days | 3% |
Hollie Procter | 10/10 | 2961 days | 3% |
Alan Brown | 9/10 | 2961 days | 3% |
Matthias Wohlgemuth | 5/10 | 2975 days | 2% |
Michael Jeffress | 2/10 | 2985 days | 1% |
S Webb | 9/10 | 3053 days | 3% |
Julia Hamblyn | 10/10 | 3084 days | 3% |
Margo Wiltens | 10/10 | 3090 days | 2% |
Rebecca Bowles | 10/10 | 3218 days | 2% |
W Donovan | 9/10 | 3243 days | 2% |
Ray Tombs | 10/10 | 3257 days | 2% |
Chadd Holland | 10/10 | 3269 days | 2% |
Averil Ford | 5/10 | 3298 days | 2% |
Paul Smith | 7/10 | 3306 days | 2% |
Felicity Fay | 10/10 | 3326 days | 2% |
Yung Ok Yoo | 8/10 | 3359 days | 2% |
Max Brunner | 9/10 | 3381 days | 2% |
Sarah Gurney | 8/10 | 3393 days | 2% |
Georgia Posar | 10/10 | 3596 days | 2% |
Soizic Vandermeersch | 8/10 | 3625 days | 1% |
Rossco | 7/10 | 3633 days | 1% |
Kurz Werner | 8/10 | 3633 days | 1% |
Andrew Cruickshank | 10/10 | 3664 days | 1% |
Jan Collins | 6/10 | 3694 days | 1% |
Roeland Driessen | 9/10 | 3723 days | 1% |
Simon Wild | 8/10 | 3733 days | 1% |
Philippe Tremblay | 10/10 | 3747 days | 1% |
Jay | 10/10 | 3760 days | 1% |
Michael Bird | 8/10 | 3876 days | 1% |
Glyn and Karen Farlow | 9/10 | 4045 days | 0% |
Tony Butcher | 10/10 | 4057 days | 1% |
Monique Monique | 9/10 | 4057 days | 1% |
Helene & Peter | 8/10 | 4149 days | 0% |
Grantygrant | 9/10 | 4363 days | 0% |
shaynne thompson | 10/10 | 4363 days | 0% |
Elizabeth Stenhouse | 10/10 | 4363 days | 0% |
Helen | 9/10 | 4394 days | 1% |
Abby | 10/10 | 4394 days | 1% |
Melvin Groenhof | 9/10 | 4399 days | 1% |
Phil & Laura | 9/10 | 4422 days | 1% |
andrei797 | 5/10 | 4422 days | 1% |
Cmi | 8/10 | 4453 days | 1% |
doepie277 | 6/10 | 4453 days | 1% |
Hanneke P | 7/10 | 4453 days | 1% |
Jon Barratt | 9/10 | 4490 days | 1% |
Christian | 10/10 | 4496 days | 1% |
Meryem Buchwitz | 9/10 | 4497 days | 1% |
davidtanks | 10/10 | 4545 days | 1% |
LuisaAndDiana | 10/10 | 4545 days | 1% |
hooijack | 10/10 | 4667 days | 1% |
Kimothy | 8/10 | 4728 days | 1% |
Carole Carter | 5/10 | 4751 days | 1% |
Stephanie Spurr | 8/10 | 4755 days | 1% |
Robert | 8/10 | 4765 days | 1% |
Fries | 10/10 | 4768 days | 1% |
Robert MacLeod-Smith | 7/10 | 4784 days | 1% |
DrCamper | 10/10 | 4850 days | 1% |
Melanie Wood | 9/10 | 4866 days | 1% |
Wendy Ashmore | 10/10 | 4866 days | 1% |
damaca | 8/10 | 4941 days | 1% |
Jansen | 8/10 | 5112 days | 1% |
K Dahmer | 10/10 | 5118 days | 1% |
Eddie Stevens | 8/10 | 5119 days | 1% |
John Gray | 7/10 | 5126 days | 1% |
Alexander & Stephanie | 9/10 | 5130 days | 1% |
Phil Hunter | 9/10 | 5144 days | 1% |
Leontine van Laar | 8/10 | 5148 days | 1% |
Jensen | 10/10 | 5150 days | 1% |
chawker | 8/10 | 5245 days | 1% |
rayfuge | 10/10 | 5245 days | 1% |
lookout | 9/10 | 5245 days | 1% |
Bandulu | 10/10 | 5245 days | 1% |
Mikeminch | 8/10 | 5245 days | 1% |
birdsong | 3/10 | 5429 days | 1% |
San Ahuia | 9/10 | 5509 days | 1% |
nigelst | 5/10 | 5524 days | 1% |
John | 7/10 | 5873 days | 1% |
carrie | 10/10 | 5883 days | 1% |
Several adjustments to the weighted average are added to improve relevancy and credibility. These adjustments apply equally to all experiences that meet the criteria.
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 The Camp experience has plenty of reviews and does not meet the criteria for any adjustment.
-0.26% Adjustment
There may be an adjustment if this experience hasn't received any reviews within the last 57 days. However the The Camp 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 The Camp experience has been adjusted for 13 days. Adjustments are according to the following table.
Days | Adjustment |
---|---|
… | … |
10 | -0.20% |
11 | -0.22% |
12 | -0.24% |
13 | -0.26% |
14 | -0.28% |
15 | -0.30% |
16 | -0.32% |
… | … |
3.18% 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.
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.