Skip to main content
Where to ski

Compare ski resorts

Compare long-term ski-area quality, current conditions and short-term seven-day skiing scenarios without mixing their evidence.

Selected10 of 10
ProfileBalanced
ModeStructural
Comparison workspace

Shape the comparison

Set the comparison priorities, then inspect which selected resort fits best and what could change the result.

10 of 10 selected
Export
Add resorts

Balances permanent quality, snow reliability, terrain and current conditions.

Tune prioritiesBalanced
Decision weights

Missing resort data remain eligible: unavailable evidence is omitted and confidence falls instead of the resort receiving a zero.

More comparison optionsTrip context · direct add · display
Fit = structural suitabilityNow = current opportunityDecision combines both when timing makes current conditions relevant
How Benchmark works

Priorities determine the structural ranking; optional trip context refines those priorities without excluding a resort. Evidence describes data support, Stability tests nearby priority changes, and Frontier marks a non-dominated option on comparable evidence.

Trip contextOptional

Use these only when they matter for this trip. They adjust ranking and interpretation; they are not hidden filters.

Travel origin is preserved with the decision state; access scoring uses the selected arrival hub when one is chosen.
Display options
Comparison sections
Decision horizon
Recommendation

Decision summary

Au Schoppernau narrowly leads because of strong terrain match · 85/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence, good reliability match · 65/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence. Chamonix is the strongest alternative. 5 options remain on the Pareto frontier. 6 options have limited evidence coverage.

Balanced profileSummer / glacier
Effectively tied

Au Schoppernau

79/100
Why
  1. Au Schoppernau narrowly leads because of strong terrain match · 85/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence, good reliability match · 65/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence. Chamonix is the strongest alternative. 5 options remain on the Pareto frontier. 6 options have limited evidence coverage.
Limited evidenceUpdated 16 h ago
  • Strong overall decision score (79/100).

Evidence coverage is limited; the ranking may move with new observations.

AlternativeChamonix
Main uncertaintyThe lead over Chamonix is small. Some requested evidence is unavailable; the score is rescaled over the evidence that exists.
Would change ifFresh observations or stronger source agreement could materially change the ranking.
Limited evidenceUpdated 16 h ago1.6 pts lead
Next
Open webcamsShow on mapInspect forecast
Detailed comparison reasoningEvidence bridge, trade-offs and decision boundaries
Recommended for this profile

Au Schoppernau

Advanced-terrain specialistEffectively tied

Effectively tied with Chamonix. strong terrain match · 85/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence, good reliability match · 65/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence—but the result is close.

Why Au Schoppernau leads Chamonix Terrain fit +7.0 pts and Snow reliability +0.9 pts
Terrain fit +7.0Snow now -6.7Snow reliability +0.9Access +0.2
Incoming snow and Weather stay in the forecast layer unless current/forecast evidence is explicitly part of the Decision score.

Strongest alternativeChamonix

Main uncertaintyThe lead over Chamonix is small. Some requested evidence is unavailable; the score is rescaled over the evidence that exists.

What could change the resultReduce lift system weight from 14 to 7 and Chamonix becomes the leading option.

Lead margin1.6pts

Difference between the first and second option.

Ranking stabilityHigh100%

The ranking changes little under nearby priority weights. Rank range 3–3.

Evidence confidence53%

Coverage and coherence of evidence used by this comparison.

Advanced analysisSensitivity, Pareto trade-offs and score contributions
Pareto frontier5 options

2 options are dominated on commonly available dimensions.

Lowest-regret optionStubaier gletscher · 94% robustness
Explore decision boundaries · what preference change flips the winner?

These are the smallest tested single-dimension changes that produce a different leader. Apply one to inspect that scenario; no new database query is required to calculate the boundary.

Lift systemChamonix

Reduce lift system weight from 14 to 7 and Chamonix becomes the leading option.

14 → 7
ScaleChamonix

Increase scale weight from 16 to 32 and Chamonix becomes the leading option.

16 → 32
AccessChamonix

Increase access weight from 12 to 44 and Chamonix becomes the leading option.

12 → 44
Family & valueAbondance

Increase family & value weight from 12 to 46 and Abondance becomes the leading option.

12 → 46
Why Au Schoppernau leads Chamonix · 1.6 pts
Current opportunity-6.7 pts
Lift system+4.4 pts
Terrain+2.6 pts
Snow+0.9 pts
Scale-0.7 pts
Family & value+0.7 pts

Point contributions reconcile the structural Fit dimensions and confidence-limited current opportunity. Missing evidence is not treated as zero.

More comparison leadersAdditional category leaders

Resort overview

Trip match is profile-specific. Expand the calculation to see exactly how each score is built.

Au Schoppernau

#1 · Au Schoppernau · Austria

Decision79/100
Fit79/100
Now0/100
Quality–/10
Now00 cm freshReliability6565/100Terrain8585/100Access7577 min
Decision score composition

Fit remains the structural anchor. Current opportunity receives weight only when current evidence is available, covered and fresh; otherwise Decision falls back toward Fit.

Fit79.0100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision79.0/100
Structural Fit calculation

Missing evidence is unknown, never zero. Available dimensions are rescaled to 100%; evidence coverage remains visible separately.

Snow65/100 · 37% evidence 15.5 / 24.0 pts
Terrain87/100 · 44% evidence 19.0 / 22.0 pts
Scale81/100 · 85% evidence 12.9 / 16.0 pts
Lift system97/100 · 8% evidence 13.6 / 14.0 pts
Access75/100 · 68% evidence 9.0 / 12.0 pts
Family & value74/100 · 41% evidence 8.9 / 12.0 pts

Data coverage: 46%

Current-opportunity calculation

Missing evidence is unknown, never zero. Available dimensions are rescaled to 100%; evidence coverage remains visible separately.

Fresh snow0 cm 0.0 / 100.0 pts
Mid-mountain snowNo data excluded
Mountain snowNo data excluded
Open terrainNo data excluded
Snow qualityNo data excluded
Valley snowNo data excluded

Data coverage: 16%

Destination typeAdvanced-terrain specialistBest useAdvanced skiing · 81/100Snow reliabilityHighSki area40 km · 1,240 m verticalBest transfer77 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group<50 km · Top 2,000–2,799 m
Strengths
  • Strong terrain match · 85/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence..
  • Good reliability match · 65/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence..
Consider

Scale trails the selected-set median by 10 points.

Chamonix

#2 · Chamonix Valley · France

Decision77/100
Fit82/100
Now49/100
Quality6.0/10
Now49259 cm upperReliability7171/100Terrain8686/100Access8563 min
Decision score composition

Fit remains the structural anchor. Current opportunity receives weight only when current evidence is available, covered and fresh; otherwise Decision falls back toward Fit.

Fit81.986% weight Now48.814% weight Decision77.4/100
Structural Fit calculation

Missing evidence is unknown, never zero. Available dimensions are rescaled to 100%; evidence coverage remains visible separately.

Snow71/100 · 73% evidence 16.9 / 24.0 pts
Terrain86/100 · 80% evidence 19.0 / 22.0 pts
Scale98/100 · 85% evidence 15.7 / 16.0 pts
Lift system76/100 · 68% evidence 10.7 / 14.0 pts
Access85/100 · 68% evidence 10.2 / 12.0 pts
Family & value79/100 · 41% evidence 9.5 / 12.0 pts

Data coverage: 71%

Current-opportunity calculation

Missing evidence is unknown, never zero. Available dimensions are rescaled to 100%; evidence coverage remains visible separately.

Mountain snow259 cm 37.0 / 42.9 pts
Fresh snow0 cm 0.0 / 22.9 pts
Valley snow30 cm 3.8 / 22.9 pts
Mid-mountain snow167 cm 8.0 / 11.4 pts
Open terrainNo data excluded
Snow qualityNo data excluded

Data coverage: 70%

Destination typeAdvanced-terrain specialistBest useAdvanced skiing · 84/100Snow reliabilityHighSki area175 km · 2,842 m verticalTerrain >2,000 m55%Best transfer63 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group150–299 km · Top 2,800+ m
Strengths
  • Strong terrain match · 86/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale..
  • Good reliability match · 71/100 — led by strong snow resilience..

Abondance

#3 · Les Portes du Soleil · France

Decision72/100
Fit72/100
Now0/100
Quality–/10
Now00 cm freshReliability6060/100Terrain7676/100
Decision score composition

Fit remains the structural anchor. Current opportunity receives weight only when current evidence is available, covered and fresh; otherwise Decision falls back toward Fit.

Fit71.5100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision71.5/100
Structural Fit calculation

Missing evidence is unknown, never zero. Available dimensions are rescaled to 100%; evidence coverage remains visible separately.

Snow60/100 · 37% evidence 16.3 / 27.3 pts
Terrain73/100 · 44% evidence 18.1 / 25.0 pts
Scale88/100 · 100% evidence 15.9 / 18.2 pts
Lift system52/100 · 68% evidence 8.3 / 15.9 pts
Family & value95/100 · 28% evidence 12.9 / 13.6 pts
AccessNo data excluded

Data coverage: 47%

Current-opportunity calculation

Missing evidence is unknown, never zero. Available dimensions are rescaled to 100%; evidence coverage remains visible separately.

Fresh snow0 cm 0.0 / 100.0 pts
Mid-mountain snowNo data excluded
Mountain snowNo data excluded
Open terrainNo data excluded
Snow qualityNo data excluded
Valley snowNo data excluded

Data coverage: 16%

Destination typeLarge-domain explorerBest useFamily trips · 75/100Snow reliabilityMarginalSki area580 km · 1,269 m verticalCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group300+ km · Top 2,000–2,799 m
Strengths
  • Good terrain match · 76/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence..
  • Solid reliability match · 60/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence..
Consider

Snow trails the selected-set median by 11 points.

Stubaier gletscher

#4 · Stubaier gletscher · Austria

Decision70/100
Fit85/100
Now3/100
Quality9.0/10
Now310 cm upperReliability9595/100Terrain8080/100Access9733 min
Decision score composition

Fit remains the structural anchor. Current opportunity receives weight only when current evidence is available, covered and fresh; otherwise Decision falls back toward Fit.

Fit85.381% weight Now3.119% weight Decision69.8/100
Structural Fit calculation

Missing evidence is unknown, never zero. Available dimensions are rescaled to 100%; evidence coverage remains visible separately.

Snow95/100 · 37% evidence 22.7 / 24.0 pts
Terrain70/100 · 52% evidence 15.5 / 22.0 pts
Scale91/100 · 100% evidence 14.5 / 16.0 pts
Lift system76/100 · 68% evidence 10.7 / 14.0 pts
Access97/100 · 68% evidence 11.6 / 12.0 pts
Family & value86/100 · 41% evidence 10.3 / 12.0 pts

Data coverage: 59%

Current-opportunity calculation

Missing evidence is unknown, never zero. Available dimensions are rescaled to 100%; evidence coverage remains visible separately.

Mountain snow10 cm 1.1 / 33.3 pts
Open terrain8% 1.8 / 22.2 pts
Fresh snow0 cm 0.0 / 17.8 pts
Valley snow0 cm 0.0 / 17.8 pts
Mid-mountain snow6 cm 0.2 / 8.9 pts
Snow qualityNo data excluded

Data coverage: 90%

Destination typeLarge-domain explorerBest useShort breaks · 88/100Snow reliabilityExceptionalSki area65 km · 1,515 m verticalBest transfer33 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group50–149 km · Top 2,800+ mCalendar contextMountain snow is 64% below the available five-year level for this point in the season.
Strengths
  • Strong terrain match · 80/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence..
  • Exceptional reliability match · 95/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence..
Consider

Some enriched evidence is unavailable; it is excluded from the score rather than treated as zero.

Breuil Cervinia

#5 · Matterhorn Ski Paradise · Italy

Decision68/100
Fit75/100
Now20/100
Quality9.2/10
Now20101 cm upperReliability9494/100Terrain7171/100Access61104 min
Decision score composition

Fit remains the structural anchor. Current opportunity receives weight only when current evidence is available, covered and fresh; otherwise Decision falls back toward Fit.

Fit75.486% weight Now20.114% weight Decision67.8/100
Structural Fit calculation

Missing evidence is unknown, never zero. Available dimensions are rescaled to 100%; evidence coverage remains visible separately.

Snow94/100 · 73% evidence 22.5 / 24.0 pts
Terrain75/100 · 80% evidence 16.4 / 22.0 pts
Scale99/100 · 100% evidence 15.9 / 16.0 pts
Lift system40/100 · 68% evidence 5.6 / 14.0 pts
Access61/100 · 68% evidence 7.3 / 12.0 pts
Family & value64/100 · 41% evidence 7.7 / 12.0 pts

Data coverage: 74%

Current-opportunity calculation

Missing evidence is unknown, never zero. Available dimensions are rescaled to 100%; evidence coverage remains visible separately.

Mountain snow101 cm 14.4 / 42.9 pts
Fresh snow0 cm 0.0 / 22.9 pts
Valley snow19 cm 2.4 / 22.9 pts
Mid-mountain snow68 cm 3.2 / 11.4 pts
Open terrainNo data excluded
Snow qualityNo data excluded

Data coverage: 70%

Destination typeHigh-alpine snow anchorBest useSnow-first trips · 81/100Snow reliabilityVery highSki area322 km · 2,337 m verticalTerrain >2,000 m92%Best transfer104 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group300+ km · Top 2,800+ mCalendar contextMountain snow is 22% below the available five-year level for this point in the season.
Strengths
  • Good terrain match · 71/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale..
  • Exceptional reliability match · 94/100 — led by strong snow resilience..
Consider

Lift-system evidence is less convincing.

Saas

#6 · Saastal · Switzerland

Decision64/100
Fit64/100
Now0/100
Quality8.7/10
Now00 cm freshReliability7474/100Terrain7070/100Access10441 min
Decision score composition

Fit remains the structural anchor. Current opportunity receives weight only when current evidence is available, covered and fresh; otherwise Decision falls back toward Fit.

Fit63.7100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision63.7/100
Structural Fit calculation

Missing evidence is unknown, never zero. Available dimensions are rescaled to 100%; evidence coverage remains visible separately.

Snow74/100 · 73% evidence 17.7 / 24.0 pts
Terrain74/100 · 80% evidence 16.3 / 22.0 pts
Scale97/100 · 85% evidence 15.5 / 16.0 pts
Lift system39/100 · 68% evidence 5.4 / 14.0 pts
Access10/100 · 68% evidence 1.2 / 12.0 pts
Family & value63/100 · 41% evidence 7.6 / 12.0 pts

Data coverage: 71%

Current-opportunity calculation

Missing evidence is unknown, never zero. Available dimensions are rescaled to 100%; evidence coverage remains visible separately.

Fresh snow0 cm 0.0 / 100.0 pts
Mid-mountain snowNo data excluded
Mountain snowNo data excluded
Open terrainNo data excluded
Snow qualityNo data excluded
Valley snowNo data excluded

Data coverage: 16%

Destination typeLarge-domain explorerBest useAdvanced skiing · 70/100Snow reliabilityVery highSki area142 km · 2,101 m verticalTerrain >2,000 m57%Best transfer441 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group50–149 km · Top 2,800+ m
Strengths
  • Good terrain match · 70/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale..
  • Good reliability match · 74/100 — led by strong snow resilience..
Consider

Access is a relative compromise.

Blonay

#7 · Les Pleiades · Switzerland

Decision54/100
Fit54/100
Now0/100
Quality–/10
Now00 cm freshReliability3333/100Terrain5858/100Access7358 min
Decision score composition

Fit remains the structural anchor. Current opportunity receives weight only when current evidence is available, covered and fresh; otherwise Decision falls back toward Fit.

Fit53.9100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision53.9/100
Structural Fit calculation

Missing evidence is unknown, never zero. Available dimensions are rescaled to 100%; evidence coverage remains visible separately.

Snow33/100 · 37% evidence 8.0 / 24.0 pts
Terrain49/100 · 44% evidence 10.7 / 22.0 pts
Scale32/100 · 100% evidence 5.2 / 16.0 pts
Lift system67/100 · 68% evidence 9.4 / 14.0 pts
Access73/100 · 68% evidence 8.7 / 12.0 pts
Family & value99/100 · 28% evidence 11.9 / 12.0 pts

Data coverage: 56%

Current-opportunity calculation

Missing evidence is unknown, never zero. Available dimensions are rescaled to 100%; evidence coverage remains visible separately.

Fresh snow0 cm 0.0 / 100.0 pts
Mid-mountain snowNo data excluded
Mountain snowNo data excluded
Open terrainNo data excluded
Snow qualityNo data excluded
Valley snowNo data excluded

Data coverage: 16%

Destination typeFamily progression baseBest useFamily trips · 66/100Snow reliabilityLowSki area8 km · 280 m verticalBest transfer58 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group<50 km · Top <2,000 m
Strengths
  • Solid terrain match · 58/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence..
  • Mixed reliability match · 33/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence..
Consider

Snow resilience is less distinctive.

Bad Camberg

#8 · · Germany

Decision–/100
Fit–/100
Now–/100
Quality–/10
Structural Fit calculation

Missing evidence is unknown, never zero. Available dimensions are rescaled to 100%; evidence coverage remains visible separately.

AccessNo data excluded
Family & valueNo data excluded
Lift systemNo data excluded
ScaleNo data excluded
SnowNo data excluded
TerrainNo data excluded

Data coverage: 0%

Current-opportunity calculation

Missing evidence is unknown, never zero. Available dimensions are rescaled to 100%; evidence coverage remains visible separately.

Fresh snowNo data excluded
Mid-mountain snowNo data excluded
Mountain snowNo data excluded
Open terrainNo data excluded
Snow qualityNo data excluded
Valley snowNo data excluded

Data coverage: 0%

Destination typeEvidence-limited destinationSnow reliabilityNot availableSki area– · – verticalCurrent dataNo current update
Strengths
  • The destination remains scoreable, but there is not enough evidence for a strong archetype.
Consider

Some enriched evidence is unavailable; it is excluded from the score rather than treated as zero.

Acquarossa

#9 · · Switzerland

Decision–/100
Fit–/100
Now–/100
Quality–/10
Structural Fit calculation

Missing evidence is unknown, never zero. Available dimensions are rescaled to 100%; evidence coverage remains visible separately.

AccessNo data excluded
Family & valueNo data excluded
Lift systemNo data excluded
ScaleNo data excluded
SnowNo data excluded
TerrainNo data excluded

Data coverage: 0%

Current-opportunity calculation

Missing evidence is unknown, never zero. Available dimensions are rescaled to 100%; evidence coverage remains visible separately.

Fresh snowNo data excluded
Mid-mountain snowNo data excluded
Mountain snowNo data excluded
Open terrainNo data excluded
Snow qualityNo data excluded
Valley snowNo data excluded

Data coverage: 0%

Destination typeEvidence-limited destinationSnow reliabilityNot availableSki area– · – verticalCurrent dataUpdated for selected date
Strengths
  • The destination remains scoreable, but there is not enough evidence for a strong archetype.
Consider

Some enriched evidence is unavailable; it is excluded from the score rather than treated as zero.

Bauma

#10 · · Switzerland

Decision–/100
Fit–/100
Now–/100
Quality–/10
Structural Fit calculation

Missing evidence is unknown, never zero. Available dimensions are rescaled to 100%; evidence coverage remains visible separately.

AccessNo data excluded
Family & valueNo data excluded
Lift systemNo data excluded
ScaleNo data excluded
SnowNo data excluded
TerrainNo data excluded

Data coverage: 0%

Current-opportunity calculation

Missing evidence is unknown, never zero. Available dimensions are rescaled to 100%; evidence coverage remains visible separately.

Fresh snowNo data excluded
Mid-mountain snowNo data excluded
Mountain snowNo data excluded
Open terrainNo data excluded
Snow qualityNo data excluded
Valley snowNo data excluded

Data coverage: 0%

Destination typeEvidence-limited destinationSnow reliabilityNot availableSki area– · – verticalCurrent dataUpdated for selected date
Strengths
  • The destination remains scoreable, but there is not enough evidence for a strong archetype.
Consider

Some enriched evidence is unavailable; it is excluded from the score rather than treated as zero.

Side-by-side evidence

Detailed comparison

Structural snow resilience uses the multi-winter early/core/late archive after daily de-duplication. Calendar-date rows separately compare current observations with the previous five years. Missing archive evidence remains unknown.

Scroll horizontally to compare resortsThe attribute column stays visible
AttributeAu SchoppernauAu SchoppernauChamonixChamonix ValleyAbondanceLes Portes du SoleilStubaier gletscherStubaier gletscherBreuil CerviniaMatterhorn Ski ParadiseSaasSaastalBlonayLes PleiadesBad CambergGermanyAcquarossaSwitzerlandBaumaSwitzerland
Assessment
Decision score 79/10077/10072/10070/10068/10064/10054/100–––
Structural Fit 79/10082/10072/10085/10075/10064/10054/100–––
Current opportunity 0/10049/100clear advantage0/1003/10020/1000/1000/100–––
Overall quality –6.0/10–9.0/109.2/108.7/10––––
Recommendation confidence LowMediumLowMediumMediumMediumLowLowLowLow
Ski-area profile
Historical snow reliability 70/10068/10047/10094/100clear advantage76/10078/10033/100–––
Typical daytime high 0°C3°C8°C-6°Cclear advantage-2°C1°C4°C–––
Typical snow/freezing level ––––––––––
Typical overnight low -4°C-4°C3°C-12°Cclear advantage-7°C-6°C-3°C–––
Rating 7.0/108.1/10–7.6/108.1/107.4/10––––
Area size class 20–50 km150–250 km250+ km50–100 km250+ km100–150 km20 km or less–––
Ability profile advancedadvancedintermediatenoviceadvancedadvancedadvanced–––
Price class avghighavgavghighhigh––––
Terrain and altitude
Marked pistes 40 km175 km580 kmclear advantage65 km322 km142 km8 km–––
Lowest point 850 m1,000 m985 m1,695 m1,562 m1,472 m1,080 m–––
Highest point 2,090 m3,842 m2,254 m3,210 m3,899 m3,573 m1,360 m–––
Vertical range 1,240 m2,842 mclear advantage1,269 m1,515 m2,337 m2,101 m280 m–––
Blue pistes 33%34%53%60%23%22%49%–––
Red pistes 45%44%36%36%68%62%51%–––
Black pistes 23%22%10%4%8%16%0%–––
Terrain above 2,000 m –55%––92%clear advantage57%––––
Terrain above 3,000 m –0%––21%clear advantage0%––––
Piste-mix diversity 97/10097/10085/10074/10074/10084/100100/100–––
Slope-angle diversity –86/100clear advantage––51/10068/100––––
Very/extremely steep terrain –21%clear advantage––6%2%––––
Historical context
Historical snow resilience ––––––––––
Typical early-winter mountain depth ––––––––––
Typical core-winter mountain depth ––––––––––
Typical late-winter mountain depth ––––––––––
Snow consistency ––––––––––
Late-winter retention ––––––––––
Lower-mountain retention ––––––––––
Warm-winter resilience ––––––––––
Mountain snow versus typical –––Below typical-64% vs average · 21th percentileWell below typical-22% vs average · 19th percentile–––––
Valley snow versus typical –––Close to typical-100% vs average · 0th percentileClose to typical-4% vs average · 81th percentile–––––
Open slopes versus typical –––Well below typical-64% vs average · 11th percentile––––––
Current snow
Valley snow –30 cm–0 cm19 cm–––––
Mid-mountain snow –167 cmclear advantage–6 cm68 cm–––––
Mountain snow –259 cmclear advantage–10 cm101 cm–––––
Fresh snow 0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm–––
Snow quality ––––––––––
Snow alert 0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm–0 cm0 cm
Open terrain and lifts
Open slopes –––8%––––––
Open lifts ––––––––––
Lift capacity per piste km –556 pph/km436 pph/km678 pph/kmclear advantage298 pph/km289 pph/km511 pph/km–––
Lift-system coverage –0.48×0.25×0.38×0.28×0.28×1.65×clear advantage–––
Terrain per lift 1.0 km/lift2.5 km/lift3.5 km/lift2.5 km/lift6.3 km/lift3.6 km/lift1.1 km/lift–––
Weather
Minimum temperature 10°C8°C10°C-14°C3°C3°C13°C–11°C12°C
Maximum temperature 17°C17°C18°C1°C14°C13°C19°C–19°C18°C
Suitability and facilities
Family suitability ––familyfamily–family––––
Piste variety –slopesslopes–slopesslopes––––
Off-piste –offpiste––offpiste–––––
Cross-country ––––––––––
Lift network ––liftsliftsliftslifts––––
Mountain restaurants ––restaurants–restaurantsrestaurants––––
Après-ski ––––apresskiapresski––––
Public transport –transit–transittransit–––––
Best airport transfer 77 min63 min–33 minclear advantage104 min441 min58 min–––
Skiing per transfer hour 31 km/h transfer166 km/h transfer–118 km/h transfer186 km/h transfer19 km/h transfer8 km/h transfer–––