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.

Selected7 of 10

ProfileBalanced

ModeStructural

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. 3 options remain on the Pareto frontier. 4 options have limited evidence coverage.

Effectively tied

Au Schoppernau

79/100

Why

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. 3 options remain on the Pareto frontier. 4 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.

Open webcams Show on map Inspect 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 2–2.

Evidence confidence53%

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.

Lowest-regret optionChamonix · 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 16 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.

Breuil Cervinia

#4 · 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

#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.

Bad Camberg

#6 · · 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

#7 · · 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.

Find column

Scroll horizontally to compare resortsThe attribute column stays visible

Attribute	Au SchoppernauAu Schoppernau	ChamonixChamonix Valley	AbondanceLes Portes du Soleil	Breuil CerviniaMatterhorn Ski Paradise	SaasSaastal	Bad CambergGermany	AcquarossaSwitzerland
Assessment
Decision score	79/100	77/100	72/100	68/100	64/100	–	–
Structural Fit	79/100	82/100	72/100	75/100	64/100	–	–
Current opportunity	0/100	49/100clear advantage	0/100	20/100	0/100	–	–
Overall quality	–	6.0/10	–	9.2/10clear advantage	8.7/10	–	–
Recommendation confidence	Low	Medium	Low	Medium	Medium	Low	Low
Ski-area profile
Historical snow reliability	70/100	68/100	47/100	76/100	78/100	–	–
Typical daytime high	0°C	3°C	8°C	-2°Cclear advantage	1°C	–	–
Typical snow/freezing level	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
Typical overnight low	-4°C	-4°C	3°C	-7°C	-6°C	–	–
Rating	7.0/10	8.1/10	–	8.1/10	7.4/10	–	–
Area size class	20–50 km	150–250 km	250+ km	250+ km	100–150 km	–	–
Ability profile	advanced	advanced	intermediate	advanced	advanced	–	–
Price class	avg	high	avg	high	high	–	–
Terrain and altitude
Marked pistes	40 km	175 km	580 kmclear advantage	322 km	142 km	–	–
Lowest point	850 m	1,000 m	985 m	1,562 m	1,472 m	–	–
Highest point	2,090 m	3,842 m	2,254 m	3,899 m	3,573 m	–	–
Vertical range	1,240 m	2,842 mclear advantage	1,269 m	2,337 m	2,101 m	–	–
Blue pistes	33%	34%	53%	23%	22%	–	–
Red pistes	45%	44%	36%	68%	62%	–	–
Black pistes	23%	22%	10%	8%	16%	–	–
Terrain above 2,000 m	–	55%	–	92%clear advantage	57%	–	–
Terrain above 3,000 m	–	0%	–	21%clear advantage	0%	–	–
Piste-mix diversity	97/100	97/100	85/100	74/100	84/100	–	–
Slope-angle diversity	–	86/100clear advantage	–	51/100	68/100	–	–
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	–	–	–	Well below typical-22% vs average · 19th percentile	–	–	–
Valley snow versus typical	–	–	–	Close to typical-4% vs average · 81th percentile	–	–	–
Open slopes versus typical	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
Current snow
Valley snow	–	30 cm	–	19 cm	–	–	–
Mid-mountain snow	–	167 cmclear advantage	–	68 cm	–	–	–
Mountain snow	–	259 cmclear advantage	–	101 cm	–	–	–
Fresh snow	0 cm	0 cm	0 cm	0 cm	0 cm	–	–
Snow quality	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
Snow alert	0 cm	0 cm	0 cm	0 cm	0 cm	–	0 cm
Open terrain and lifts
Open slopes	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
Open lifts	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
Lift capacity per piste km	–	556 pph/kmclear advantage	436 pph/km	298 pph/km	289 pph/km	–	–
Lift-system coverage	–	0.48×clear advantage	0.25×	0.28×	0.28×	–	–
Terrain per lift	1.0 km/lift	2.5 km/lift	3.5 km/lift	6.3 km/lift	3.6 km/lift	–	–
Weather
Minimum temperature	10°C	8°C	10°C	3°C	3°C	–	11°C
Maximum temperature	17°C	17°C	18°C	14°C	13°C	–	19°C
Suitability and facilities
Family suitability	–	–	family	–	family	–	–
Piste variety	–	slopes	slopes	slopes	slopes	–	–
Off-piste	–	offpiste	–	offpiste	–	–	–
Cross-country	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
Lift network	–	–	lifts	lifts	lifts	–	–
Mountain restaurants	–	–	restaurants	restaurants	restaurants	–	–
Après-ski	–	–	–	apresski	apresski	–	–
Public transport	–	transit	–	transit	–	–	–
Best airport transfer	77 min	63 min	–	104 min	441 min	–	–
Skiing per transfer hour	31 km/h transfer	166 km/h transfer	–	186 km/h transfer	19 km/h transfer	–	–

Compare ski resorts

Shape the comparison

Start a comparison

Decision summary

Au Schoppernau

Au Schoppernau

Resort overview

Au Schoppernau

Chamonix

Abondance

Breuil Cervinia

Saas

Bad Camberg

Acquarossa

Detailed comparison