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.

Selected5 of 10

ProfileBalanced

ModeStructural

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. Saas Almagell is the strongest alternative. 3 options remain on the Pareto frontier. 1 option have limited evidence coverage.

Recommended

Chamonix

75/100

Why

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. Saas Almagell is the strongest alternative. 3 options remain on the Pareto frontier. 1 option have limited evidence coverage.

Mixed evidenceUpdated 24 h ago

Strong structural fit for the selected priorities (82/100).
Solid upper-mountain snow base at 145 cm.

AlternativeSaas Almagell

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.

Open webcams Show on map Inspect 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 Saas Almagell Access +4.5 pts and Snow now +4.0 pts

Access +4.5Snow now +4.0Snow reliability -3.1Terrain fit +2.6

Incoming snow and Weather stay in the forecast layer unless current/forecast evidence is explicitly part of the Decision score.

Strongest alternativeSaas Almagell

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

What could change the resultIncrease snow weight from 24 to 75 and Fieschertal becomes the leading option.

Lead margin8.0pts

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 frontier3 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.

SnowFieschertal

Increase snow weight from 24 to 75 and Fieschertal becomes the leading option.

24 → 75

Family & valueFieschertal

Increase family & value weight from 12 to 78 and Fieschertal becomes the leading option.

12 → 78

Why Chamonix leads Saas Almagell · 8.0 pts

Access+4.5 pts

Current opportunity+4.0 pts

Lift system+3.8 pts

Snow-3.1 pts

Scale-1.9 pts

Family & value+0.6 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.

Shared ski-area data: Saas Almagell, Saas share Saastal. Permanent profile values are identical; current local observations may differ.

Chamonix

#1 · Chamonix Valley · France

Decision75/100

Fit82/100

Now29/100

Quality6.0/10

Now29145 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 Now29.214% weight Decision74.8/100

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 snow145 cm 20.7 / 42.9 pts

Fresh snow0 cm 0.0 / 22.9 pts

Valley snow30 cm 3.8 / 22.9 pts

Mid-mountain snow99 cm 4.7 / 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+ mCalendar contextMountain snow is 133% above the available five-year level for this point in the season.

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..

Saas Almagell

#2 · Saastal · Switzerland

Decision67/100

Fit67/100

Now0/100

Quality8.7/10

Now00 cm freshReliability7474/100Terrain7070/100Access36151 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.

Fit66.8100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision66.8/100

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

Access36/100 · 68% evidence 4.3 / 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 · 71/100Snow reliabilityVery highSki area142 km · 2,101 m verticalTerrain >2,000 m57%Best transfer151 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

Lift-system evidence is less convincing.

Fieschertal

#3 · Bellwald · Switzerland

Decision66/100

Fit66/100

Now0/100

Quality–/10

Now00 cm freshReliability8383/100Terrain5959/100

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.

Fit65.5100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision65.5/100

Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow83/100 · 37% evidence 22.5 / 27.3 pts

Terrain66/100 · 44% evidence 16.4 / 25.0 pts

Scale63/100 · 85% evidence 11.4 / 18.2 pts

Lift system23/100 · 68% evidence 3.6 / 15.9 pts

Family & value85/100 · 41% evidence 11.6 / 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 typeFamily progression baseBest useSnow-first trips · 71/100Snow reliabilityExceptionalSki area20 km · 958 m verticalCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group<50 km · Top 2,000–2,799 m

Strengths

Solid terrain match · 59/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence..
Strong reliability match · 83/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence..

Consider

Lift-system evidence is less convincing.

Breuil Cervinia

#4 · Matterhorn Ski Paradise · Italy

Decision64/100

Fit75/100

Now22/100

Quality9.2/10

Now2275 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.

Fit75.478% weight Now22.022% weight Decision63.9/100

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 snow75 cm 7.5 / 30.0 pts

Open terrain7% 1.4 / 20.0 pts

Fresh snow0 cm 0.0 / 16.0 pts

Valley snow19 cm 1.7 / 16.0 pts

Snow quality9.6/10 9.6 / 10.0 pts

Mid-mountain snow53 cm 1.8 / 8.0 pts

Data coverage: 100%

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 40% 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

#5 · 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.

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.

Find column

Scroll horizontally to compare resortsThe attribute column stays visible

Attribute	ChamonixChamonix Valley	Saas AlmagellSaastal	FieschertalBellwald	Breuil CerviniaMatterhorn Ski Paradise	SaasSaastal
Assessment
Decision score	75/100clear advantage	67/100	66/100	64/100	64/100
Structural Fit	82/100clear advantage	67/100	66/100	75/100	64/100
Current opportunity	29/100clear advantage	0/100	0/100	22/100	0/100
Overall quality	6.0/10	8.7/10	–	9.2/10clear advantage	Shared ski-area value
Recommendation confidence	Medium	Medium	Low	Medium	Medium
Ski-area profile
Historical snow reliability	68/100	78/100	80/100	76/100	Shared ski-area value
Typical daytime high	3°C	1°C	-1°C	-2°C	Shared ski-area value
Typical snow/freezing level	–	–	–	–	Shared ski-area value
Typical overnight low	-4°C	-6°C	-7°C	-7°C	Shared ski-area value
Rating	8.1/10	7.4/10	6.5/10	8.1/10	Shared ski-area value
Area size class	150–250 km	100–150 km	20 km or less	250+ km	Shared ski-area value
Ability profile	advanced	advanced	intermediate	advanced	Shared ski-area value
Price class	high	high	avg	high	Shared ski-area value
Terrain and altitude
Marked pistes	175 km	142 km	20 km	322 kmclear advantage	Shared ski-area value
Lowest point	1,000 m	1,472 m	1,600 m	1,562 m	Shared ski-area value
Highest point	3,842 m	3,573 m	2,558 m	3,899 m	Shared ski-area value
Vertical range	2,842 mclear advantage	2,101 m	958 m	2,337 m	Shared ski-area value
Blue pistes	34%	22%	53%	23%	Shared ski-area value
Red pistes	44%	62%	39%	68%	Shared ski-area value
Black pistes	22%clear advantage	16%	9%	8%	Shared ski-area value
Terrain above 2,000 m	55%	57%	–	92%clear advantage	Shared ski-area value
Terrain above 3,000 m	0%	0%	–	21%clear advantage	Shared ski-area value
Piste-mix diversity	97/100clear advantage	84/100	83/100	74/100	Shared ski-area value
Slope-angle diversity	86/100clear advantage	68/100	–	51/100	Shared ski-area value
Very/extremely steep terrain	21%clear advantage	2%	–	6%	Shared ski-area value
Historical context
Historical snow resilience	–	–	–	–	Shared ski-area value
Typical early-winter mountain depth	–	–	–	–	Shared ski-area value
Typical core-winter mountain depth	–	–	–	–	Shared ski-area value
Typical late-winter mountain depth	–	–	–	–	Shared ski-area value
Snow consistency	–	–	–	–	Shared ski-area value
Late-winter retention	–	–	–	–	Shared ski-area value
Lower-mountain retention	–	–	–	–	Shared ski-area value
Warm-winter resilience	–	–	–	–	Shared ski-area value
Mountain snow versus typical	Well above typical+133% vs average · 100th percentile	–	–	Well below typical-40% vs average · 4th percentile	–
Valley snow versus typical	–	–	–	Below typical-40% vs average · 58th percentile	–
Open slopes versus typical	–	–	–	Close to typical-21% vs average · 46th percentile	–
Current snow
Valley snow	30 cm	–	–	19 cm	–
Mid-mountain snow	99 cmclear advantage	–	–	53 cm	–
Mountain snow	145 cmclear advantage	–	–	75 cm	–
Fresh snow	0 cm	0 cm	0 cm	0 cm	0 cm
Snow quality	–	–	–	9.6/10	–
Snow alert	0 cm	0 cm	0 cm	0 cm	0 cm
Open terrain and lifts
Open slopes	–	–	–	7%	–
Open lifts	–	–	–	–	–
Lift capacity per piste km	556 pph/kmclear advantage	289 pph/km	239 pph/km	298 pph/km	Shared ski-area value
Lift-system coverage	0.48×clear advantage	0.28×	0.28×	0.28×	Shared ski-area value
Terrain per lift	2.5 km/lift	3.6 km/lift	4.0 km/lift	6.3 km/lift	Shared ski-area value
Weather
Minimum temperature	4°C	3°C	4°C	1°C	1°C
Maximum temperature	11°C	10°C	13°C	9°C	6°C
Suitability and facilities
Family suitability	–	family	family	–	Shared ski-area value
Piste variety	slopes	slopes	–	slopes	Shared ski-area value
Off-piste	offpiste	–	–	offpiste	Shared ski-area value
Cross-country	–	–	–	–	Shared ski-area value
Lift network	–	lifts	–	lifts	Shared ski-area value
Mountain restaurants	–	restaurants	–	restaurants	Shared ski-area value
Après-ski	–	apresski	–	apresski	Shared ski-area value
Public transport	transit	–	–	transit	Shared ski-area value
Best airport transfer	63 minclear advantage	151 min	–	104 min	441 min
Skiing per transfer hour	166 km/h transfer	56 km/h transfer	–	186 km/h transfer	19 km/h transfer

Compare ski resorts

Shape the comparison

Start a comparison

Decision summary

Chamonix

Chamonix

Resort overview

Chamonix

Saas Almagell

Fieschertal

Breuil Cervinia

Saas

Detailed comparison