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 narrowly leads 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. Tignes is the strongest alternative. 4 options remain on the Pareto frontier.

Effectively tied

Chamonix

75/100

Why

Chamonix narrowly leads 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. Tignes is the strongest alternative. 4 options remain on the Pareto frontier.

Mixed evidenceUpdated 23 h ago

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

AlternativeTignes

Main uncertaintyThe lead over Tignes is small. Most 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 choiceEffectively tied

Effectively tied with Tignes. 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—but the result is close.

Why Chamonix leads Tignes Access +3.3 pts and Snow now +2.2 pts

Snow reliability -6.2Access +3.3Snow now +2.2Terrain fit +1.1

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

Strongest alternativeTignes

Main uncertaintyThe lead over Tignes is small. Most of the evidence requested by this priority profile is available.

What could change the resultReduce access weight from 12 to 10 and Tignes becomes the leading option.

Lead margin0.3pts

Difference between the first and second option.

Ranking stabilityHigh100%

The ranking changes little under nearby priority weights. Rank range 1–2.

Evidence confidence73%

Coverage and coherence of evidence used by this comparison.

Advanced analysisSensitivity, Pareto trade-offs and score contributions

Pareto frontier4 options

1 option is 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.

AccessTignes

Reduce access weight from 12 to 10 and Tignes becomes the leading option.

12 → 10

SnowTignes

Increase snow weight from 24 to 26 and Tignes becomes the leading option.

24 → 26

Lift systemTignes

Reduce lift system weight from 14 to 11 and Tignes becomes the leading option.

14 → 11

Family & valueTignes

Increase family & value weight from 12 to 16 and Tignes becomes the leading option.

12 → 16

Why Chamonix leads Tignes · 0.3 pts

Snow-6.2 pts

Access+3.3 pts

Current opportunity+2.2 pts

Lift system+1.8 pts

Family & value-1.7 pts

Scale+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.

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 Decision74.7/100

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..

Tignes

#2 · Espace Killy · France

Decision74/100

Fit81/100

Now18/100

Quality10.0/10

Now1819 cm upperReliability9797/100Terrain8181/100Access51120 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.

Fit80.890% weight Now17.710% weight Decision74.4/100

Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow97/100 · 73% evidence 23.2 / 24.0 pts

Terrain81/100 · 80% evidence 17.9 / 22.0 pts

Scale90/100 · 100% evidence 14.4 / 16.0 pts

Lift system59/100 · 68% evidence 8.3 / 14.0 pts

Access51/100 · 68% evidence 6.1 / 12.0 pts

Family & value92/100 · 41% evidence 11.0 / 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 snow19 cm 3.4 / 53.6 pts

Fresh snow0 cm 0.0 / 28.6 pts

Snow quality8.0/10 14.3 / 17.9 pts

Mid-mountain snowNo data excluded

Open terrainNo data excluded

Valley snowNo data excluded

Data coverage: 56%

Destination typeLarge-domain explorerBest useSnow-first trips · 86/100Snow reliabilityExceptionalSki area300 km · 1,906 m verticalTerrain >2,000 m94%Best transfer120 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group300+ km · Top 2,800+ mCalendar contextMountain snow is 74% below the available five-year level for this point in the season.

Strengths

Strong terrain match · 81/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale..
Exceptional reliability match · 97/100 — led by strong snow resilience..

Breuil Cervinia

#3 · 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

#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.

Malbun

#5 · Malbun · Liechtenstein

Decision43/100

Fit43/100

Now0/100

Quality–/10

Now00 cm freshReliability4343/100Terrain4343/100

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.

Fit43.2100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision43.2/100

Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow43/100 · 73% evidence 11.8 / 27.3 pts

Terrain24/100 · 59% evidence 6.0 / 25.0 pts

Scale16/100 · 100% evidence 2.9 / 18.2 pts

Lift system67/100 · 68% evidence 10.6 / 15.9 pts

Family & value87/100 · 31% evidence 11.9 / 13.6 pts

AccessNo data excluded

Data coverage: 60%

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 · 58/100Snow reliabilityVery highSki area1 km · 106 m verticalTerrain >2,000 m0%Current dataUpdated for selected datePeer group<50 km · Top <2,000 m

Strengths

Mixed terrain match · 43/100 — led by strong terrain profile and strong lift-system evidence; partial evidence..
Mixed reliability match · 43/100 — led by strong snow resilience..

Consider

Terrain depth is less distinctive.

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	TignesEspace Killy	Breuil CerviniaMatterhorn Ski Paradise	SaasSaastal	MalbunMalbun
Assessment
Decision score	75/100	74/100	64/100	64/100	43/100
Structural Fit	82/100	81/100	75/100	64/100	43/100
Current opportunity	29/100clear advantage	18/100	22/100	0/100	0/100
Overall quality	6.0/10	10.0/10clear advantage	9.2/10	8.7/10	–
Recommendation confidence	Medium	Medium	Medium	Medium	Medium
Ski-area profile
Historical snow reliability	68/100	99/100clear advantage	76/100	78/100	73/100
Typical daytime high	3°C	-4°C	-2°C	1°C	0°C
Typical snow/freezing level	–	–	–	–	–
Typical overnight low	-4°C	-9°C	-7°C	-6°C	-7°C
Rating	8.1/10	8.0/10	8.1/10	7.4/10	7.0/10
Area size class	150–250 km	250+ km	250+ km	100–150 km	20 km or less
Ability profile	advanced	intermediate	advanced	advanced	novice
Price class	high	high	high	high	–
Terrain and altitude
Marked pistes	175 km	300 km	322 kmclear advantage	142 km	1 km
Lowest point	1,000 m	1,550 m	1,562 m	1,472 m	1,379 m
Highest point	3,842 m	3,456 m	3,899 m	3,573 m	1,485 m
Vertical range	2,842 mclear advantage	1,906 m	2,337 m	2,101 m	106 m
Blue pistes	34%	55%	23%	22%	100%
Red pistes	44%	25%	68%	62%	0%
Black pistes	22%	20%	8%	16%	0%
Terrain above 2,000 m	55%	94%	92%	57%	0%
Terrain above 3,000 m	0%	6%	21%clear advantage	0%	0%
Piste-mix diversity	97/100	91/100	74/100	84/100	–
Slope-angle diversity	86/100clear advantage	56/100	51/100	68/100	43/100
Very/extremely steep terrain	21%clear advantage	7%	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 above typical+133% vs average · 100th percentile	Below typical-74% vs average · 21th 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	19 cm	75 cm	–	–
Fresh snow	0 cm	0 cm	0 cm	0 cm	0 cm
Snow quality	–	8.0/10	9.6/10clear advantage	–	–
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/km	513 pph/km	298 pph/km	289 pph/km	833 pph/kmclear advantage
Lift-system coverage	0.48×	0.27×	0.28×	0.28×	0.42×
Terrain per lift	2.5 km/lift	3.8 km/lift	6.3 km/lift	3.6 km/lift	1.2 km/lift
Weather
Minimum temperature	4°C	-6°C	1°C	1°C	-3°C
Maximum temperature	11°C	-2°C	9°C	6°C	10°C
Suitability and facilities
Family suitability	–	–	–	family	–
Piste variety	slopes	slopes	slopes	slopes	–
Off-piste	offpiste	offpiste	offpiste	–	–
Cross-country	–	–	–	–	–
Lift network	–	lifts	lifts	lifts	–
Mountain restaurants	–	–	restaurants	restaurants	–
Après-ski	–	apresski	apresski	apresski	–
Public transport	transit	–	transit	–	–
Best airport transfer	63 minclear advantage	120 min	104 min	441 min	–
Skiing per transfer hour	166 km/h transfer	150 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

Tignes

Breuil Cervinia

Saas

Malbun

Detailed comparison