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

Chamonix is the strongest match because of 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. Valetta is the strongest alternative. 5 options remain on the Pareto frontier. 4 options have limited evidence coverage.

Balanced profileSummer / glacier
Recommended

Chamonix

77/100
Why
  1. Chamonix is the strongest match because of 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. Valetta is the strongest alternative. 5 options remain on the Pareto frontier. 4 options have limited evidence coverage.
Mixed evidenceUpdated 17 h ago
  • Strong structural fit for the selected priorities (82/100).
  • Solid upper-mountain snow base at 259 cm.
AlternativeValetta
Main uncertaintyMost of the evidence requested by this priority profile is available.
Would change ifA material forecast shift or a different priority profile could change the ranking.
Mixed evidenceUpdated 17 h ago8.7 pts lead
Next
Open webcamsShow on mapInspect forecast
Detailed comparison reasoningEvidence bridge, trade-offs and decision boundaries
Recommended for this profile

Chamonix

Advanced-terrain specialistLow-regret choice

Leads on 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.

Why Chamonix leads Valetta Access +8.8 pts and Snow now +6.7 pts
Access +8.8Snow now +6.7Snow reliability -6.0Terrain fit -0.8
Incoming snow and Weather stay in the forecast layer unless current/forecast evidence is explicitly part of the Decision score.

Strongest alternativeValetta

Main uncertaintyMost of the evidence requested by this priority profile is available.

What could change the resultReduce lift system weight from 14 to 0 and Valetta becomes the leading option.

Lead margin8.7pts

Difference between the first and second option.

Ranking stabilityHigh100%

The ranking changes little under nearby priority weights. Rank range 1–1.

Evidence confidence73%

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.

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 systemValetta

Reduce lift system weight from 14 to 0 and Valetta becomes the leading option.

14 → 0
SnowBreuil Cervinia

Increase snow weight from 24 to 85 and Breuil Cervinia becomes the leading option.

24 → 85
Why Chamonix leads Valetta · 8.7 pts
Access+8.8 pts
Lift system+6.8 pts
Current opportunity+6.7 pts
Snow-6.0 pts
Scale-4.3 pts
Terrain-2.9 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.

Chamonix

#1 · 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..

Valetta

#2 · Sankt Moritz Celerina · Switzerland

Decision69/100
Fit69/100
Now0/100
Quality9.0/10
Now00 cm freshReliability7676/100Terrain6666/100
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.

Fit68.7100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision68.7/100
Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow76/100 · 73% evidence 20.6 / 27.3 pts
Terrain77/100 · 80% evidence 19.3 / 25.0 pts
Scale98/100 · 85% evidence 17.9 / 18.2 pts
Lift system15/100 · 68% evidence 2.4 / 15.9 pts
Family & value63/100 · 41% evidence 8.6 / 13.6 pts
AccessNo data excluded

Data coverage: 63%

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 · 72/100Snow reliabilityVery highSki area329 km · 1,633 m verticalTerrain >2,000 m82%Current dataUpdated for selected datePeer group300+ km · Top 2,800+ m
Strengths
  • Good terrain match · 66/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale..
  • Good reliability match · 76/100 — led by strong snow resilience..
Consider

Lift-system evidence is less convincing.

Breuil Cervinia

#3 · 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

#4 · 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.

Silvaplana

#5 · Corvatsch Furtschellas · Switzerland

Decision58/100
Fit65/100
Now12/100
Quality9.2/10
Now1264 cm upperReliability8989/100Terrain6262/100Access31154 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.

Fit64.786% weight Now11.714% weight Decision57.5/100
Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow89/100 · 37% evidence 21.3 / 24.0 pts
Terrain79/100 · 52% evidence 17.3 / 22.0 pts
Scale92/100 · 100% evidence 14.8 / 16.0 pts
Lift system11/100 · 68% evidence 1.5 / 14.0 pts
Access31/100 · 68% evidence 3.8 / 12.0 pts
Family & value50/100 · 41% evidence 6.0 / 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 snow64 cm 9.1 / 42.9 pts
Fresh snow0 cm 0.0 / 22.9 pts
Valley snow5 cm 0.6 / 22.9 pts
Mid-mountain snow40 cm 1.9 / 11.4 pts
Open terrainNo data excluded
Snow qualityNo data excluded

Data coverage: 70%

Destination typeLarge-domain explorerBest useSnow-first trips · 72/100Snow reliabilityVery highSki area120 km · 1,506 m verticalBest transfer154 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group50–149 km · Top 2,800+ mCalendar contextMountain snow is 49% below the available five-year level for this point in the season.
Strengths
  • Solid terrain match · 62/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence..
  • Exceptional reliability match · 89/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence..
Consider

Lift-system evidence is less convincing.

Bohinj

#6 · Bohinj Vogel · Slovenia

Decision57/100
Fit57/100
Now0/100
Quality6.8/10
Now00 cm freshReliability4040/100Terrain6464/100
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.

Fit57.4100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision57.4/100
Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow40/100 · 73% evidence 10.9 / 27.3 pts
Terrain62/100 · 80% evidence 15.4 / 25.0 pts
Scale69/100 · 85% evidence 12.6 / 18.2 pts
Lift system47/100 · 68% evidence 7.4 / 15.9 pts
Family & value81/100 · 41% evidence 11.1 / 13.6 pts
AccessNo data excluded

Data coverage: 63%

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 · 62/100Snow reliabilityMarginalSki area22 km · 1,231 m verticalTerrain >2,000 m0%Current dataUpdated for selected datePeer group<50 km · Top <2,000 m
Strengths
  • Solid terrain match · 64/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale..
  • Mixed reliability match · 40/100 — led by strong snow resilience..
Consider

Snow resilience is less distinctive.

Banska Bystrica

#7 · Banská Bystrica · Slovakia

Decision43/100
Fit43/100
Now0/100
Quality–/10
Now00 cm freshReliability3131/100Terrain4949/100
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.

Fit42.7100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision42.7/100
Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow31/100 · 37% evidence 10.0 / 32.4 pts
Terrain49/100 · 44% evidence 14.6 / 29.7 pts
Scale27/100 · 85% evidence 5.8 / 21.6 pts
Family & value76/100 · 41% evidence 12.3 / 16.2 pts
AccessNo data excluded
Lift systemNo data excluded

Data coverage: 37%

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-led destinationBest useFamily trips · 53/100Snow reliabilityMarginalSki area5 km · 302 m verticalCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group<50 km · Top <2,000 m
Strengths
  • Mixed terrain match · 49/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence..
  • Mixed reliability match · 31/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence..
Consider

Snow resilience is less distinctive.

Valtellina

#8 · · Italy

Decision39/100
Fit39/100
Now–/100
Quality–/10
Access39127 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.

Fit39.3100% weight Now–0% weight Decision39.3/100
Structural Fit calculation

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

Access39/100 · 48% evidence 39.3 / 100.0 pts
Family & valueNo data excluded
Lift systemNo data excluded
ScaleNo data excluded
SnowNo data excluded
TerrainNo data excluded

Data coverage: 6%

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 typeAccess-led destinationSnow reliabilityNot availableSki area– · – verticalBest transfer127 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected date
Strengths
  • Mixed access match · 39/100 — led by practical access; partial evidence..
  • Access is the strongest available structural dimension.
Consider

Access is a relative compromise.

Aland

#9 · · Finland

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 3 days earlier
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.

Bratislava

#10 · · Slovakia

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 6 days earlier
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
AttributeChamonixChamonix ValleyValettaSankt Moritz CelerinaBreuil CerviniaMatterhorn Ski ParadiseSaasSaastalSilvaplanaCorvatsch FurtschellasBohinjBohinj VogelBanska BystricaBanská BystricaValtellinaItalyAlandFinlandBratislavaSlovakia
Assessment
Decision score 77/100clear advantage69/10068/10064/10058/10057/10043/10039/100––
Structural Fit 82/100clear advantage69/10075/10064/10065/10057/10043/10039/100––
Current opportunity 49/100clear advantage0/10020/1000/10012/1000/1000/100–––
Overall quality 6.0/109.0/109.2/108.7/109.2/106.8/10––––
Recommendation confidence MediumMediumMediumMediumMediumMediumLowLowLowLow
Ski-area profile
Historical snow reliability 68/10074/10076/10078/10077/10041/10042/100–––
Typical daytime high 3°C-1°C-2°C1°C-5°Cclear advantage6°C3°C–––
Typical snow/freezing level ––––––––––
Typical overnight low -4°C-9°C-7°C-6°C-11°C0°C-5°C–––
Rating 8.1/107.5/108.1/107.4/107.6/106.1/105.4/10–––
Area size class 150–250 km250+ km250+ km100–150 km100–150 km20–50 km20 km or less–––
Ability profile advancedadvancedadvancedadvancedadvancedadvancedadvanced–––
Price class highhighhighhighhighlow––––
Terrain and altitude
Marked pistes 175 km329 km322 km142 km120 km22 km5 km–––
Lowest point 1,000 m1,670 m1,562 m1,472 m1,797 m569 m800 m–––
Highest point 3,842 m3,303 m3,899 m3,573 m3,303 m1,800 m1,102 m–––
Vertical range 2,842 mclear advantage1,633 m2,337 m2,101 m1,506 m1,231 m302 m–––
Blue pistes 34%21%23%22%11%43%40%–––
Red pistes 44%60%68%62%74%57%60%–––
Black pistes 22%19%8%16%15%0%0%–––
Terrain above 2,000 m 55%82%92%57%–0%––––
Terrain above 3,000 m 0%0%21%clear advantage0%–0%––––
Piste-mix diversity 97/10086/10074/10084/10068/10099/10097/100–––
Slope-angle diversity 86/100clear advantage48/10051/10068/100–42/100––––
Very/extremely steep terrain 21%clear advantage4%6%2%–1%––––
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 ––Well below typical-22% vs average · 19th percentile–Well below typical-49% vs average · 0th percentile–––––
Valley snow versus typical ––Close to typical-4% vs average · 81th percentile–Below typical-73% vs average · 29th percentile–––––
Open slopes versus typical ––––––––––
Current snow
Valley snow 30 cm–19 cm–5 cm–––––
Mid-mountain snow 167 cmclear advantage–68 cm–40 cm–––––
Mountain snow 259 cmclear advantage–101 cm–64 cm–––––
Fresh snow 0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm–––
Snow quality ––––––––––
Snow alert 0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm
Open terrain and lifts
Open slopes ––––––––––
Open lifts ––––––––––
Lift capacity per piste km 556 pph/kmclear advantage219 pph/km298 pph/km289 pph/km153 pph/km465 pph/km––––
Lift-system coverage 0.48×clear advantage0.18×0.28×0.28×0.15×0.29×––––
Terrain per lift 2.5 km/lift5.7 km/lift6.3 km/lift3.6 km/lift8.6 km/lift2.4 km/lift––––
Weather
Minimum temperature 8°C2°C4°C3°C6°C6°C3°C4°C7°C12°C
Maximum temperature 17°C6°C13°C13°C11°C17°C14°C16°C12°C23°C
Suitability and facilities
Family suitability –family–family––––––
Piste variety slopes–slopesslopes––––––
Off-piste offpisteoffpisteoffpiste–––––––
Cross-country –crosscountry––crosscountry–––––
Lift network ––liftslifts––––––
Mountain restaurants –restaurantsrestaurantsrestaurants––––––
Après-ski ––apresskiapresski––––––
Public transport transit–transit–––––––
Best airport transfer 63 minclear advantage–104 min441 min154 min––127 min––
Skiing per transfer hour 166 km/h transfer–186 km/h transfer19 km/h transfer47 km/h transfer–––––