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.

Selected5 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.

5 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. Kelchsau is the strongest alternative. 4 options remain on the Pareto frontier.

Balanced profileSummer / glacier
Narrow lead

Chamonix

75/100
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. Kelchsau is the strongest alternative. 4 options remain on the Pareto frontier.
Mixed evidenceUpdated 17 h ago
  • Strong structural fit for the selected priorities (82/100).
  • Solid upper-mountain snow base at 142 cm.
AlternativeKelchsau
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 ago4.8 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 choiceNarrow lead

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 Kelchsau Snow reliability +4.1 pts and Snow now +3.9 pts
Snow reliability +4.1Snow now +3.9Access -2.6Terrain fit -0.4
Incoming snow and Weather stay in the forecast layer unless current/forecast evidence is explicitly part of the Decision score.

Strongest alternativeKelchsau

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

What could change the resultReduce snow weight from 24 to 0 and Kelchsau becomes the leading option.

Lead margin4.8pts

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 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.

SnowKelchsau

Reduce snow weight from 24 to 0 and Kelchsau becomes the leading option.

24 → 0
AccessKelchsau

Increase access weight from 12 to 39 and Kelchsau becomes the leading option.

12 → 39
Family & valueKelchsau

Increase family & value weight from 12 to 56 and Kelchsau becomes the leading option.

12 → 56
ScaleKelchsau

Increase scale weight from 16 to 88 and Kelchsau becomes the leading option.

16 → 88
Why Chamonix leads Kelchsau · 4.8 pts
Snow+4.1 pts
Current opportunity+3.9 pts
Access-2.6 pts
Terrain+2.3 pts
Family & value-1.8 pts
Scale-1.6 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: Kelchsau, Soll am Wilden Kaiser share SkiWelt Wilder Kaiser Brixental. Permanent profile values are identical; current local observations may differ.

Chamonix

#1 · Chamonix Valley · France

Decision75/100
Fit82/100
Now29/100
Quality6.0/10
Now29142 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 Now28.714% weight Decision74.6/100
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 snow142 cm 20.3 / 42.9 pts
Fresh snow0 cm 0.0 / 22.9 pts
Valley snow30 cm 3.8 / 22.9 pts
Mid-mountain snow97 cm 4.6 / 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 109% 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..

Kelchsau

#2 · SkiWelt Wilder Kaiser Brixental · Austria

Decision70/100
Fit70/100
Now0/100
Quality5.3/10
Now00 cm freshReliability4444/100Terrain7575/100Access9553 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.

Fit69.8100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision69.8/100
Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow44/100 · 73% evidence 10.5 / 24.0 pts
Terrain64/100 · 80% evidence 14.1 / 22.0 pts
Scale95/100 · 85% evidence 15.2 / 16.0 pts
Lift system61/100 · 68% evidence 8.5 / 14.0 pts
Access95/100 · 68% evidence 11.4 / 12.0 pts
Family & value83/100 · 41% evidence 10.0 / 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 useFamily trips · 73/100Snow reliabilityModerateSki area275 km · 1,249 m verticalTerrain >2,000 m0%Best transfer53 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group150–299 km · Top <2,000 m
Strengths
  • Good terrain match · 75/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale..
  • Mixed reliability match · 44/100 — led by strong snow resilience..
Consider

Snow resilience is less distinctive.

Breuil Cervinia

#3 · Matterhorn Ski Paradise · Italy

Decision65/100
Fit75/100
Now25/100
Quality9.2/10
Now25100 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 Now25.022% weight Decision64.5/100
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 snow100 cm 10.0 / 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 snow68 cm 2.3 / 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 20% 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.

Soll am Wilden Kaiser

#5 · SkiWelt Wilder Kaiser Brixental · Austria

Decision63/100
Fit70/100
Now21/100
Quality5.3/10
Now2180 cm upperReliability4444/100Terrain7575/100Access9554 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.

Fit69.886% weight Now21.014% weight Decision63.1/100
Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow44/100 · 73% evidence 10.5 / 24.0 pts
Terrain64/100 · 80% evidence 14.1 / 22.0 pts
Scale95/100 · 85% evidence 15.2 / 16.0 pts
Lift system61/100 · 68% evidence 8.5 / 14.0 pts
Access95/100 · 68% evidence 11.4 / 12.0 pts
Family & value83/100 · 41% evidence 10.0 / 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 snow80 cm 11.4 / 42.9 pts
Fresh snow0 cm 0.0 / 22.9 pts
Valley snow50 cm 6.3 / 22.9 pts
Mid-mountain snow68 cm 3.2 / 11.4 pts
Open terrainNo data excluded
Snow qualityNo data excluded

Data coverage: 70%

Destination typeLarge-domain explorerBest useFamily trips · 73/100Snow reliabilityModerateSki area275 km · 1,249 m verticalTerrain >2,000 m0%Best transfer54 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group150–299 km · Top <2,000 m
Strengths
  • Good terrain match · 75/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale..
  • Mixed reliability match · 44/100 — led by strong snow resilience..
Consider

Snow resilience 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.

Scroll horizontally to compare resortsThe attribute column stays visible
AttributeChamonixChamonix ValleyKelchsauSkiWelt Wilder Kaiser BrixentalBreuil CerviniaMatterhorn Ski ParadiseSaasSaastalSoll am Wilden KaiserSkiWelt Wilder Kaiser Brixental
Assessment
Decision score 75/100clear advantage70/10065/10064/10063/100
Structural Fit 82/100clear advantage70/10075/10064/10070/100
Current opportunity 29/1000/10025/1000/10021/100
Overall quality 6.0/105.3/109.2/10clear advantage8.7/10Shared ski-area value
Recommendation confidence MediumMediumMediumMediumMedium
Ski-area profile
Historical snow reliability 68/10055/10076/10078/100Shared ski-area value
Typical daytime high 3°C4°C-2°Cclear advantage1°CShared ski-area value
Typical snow/freezing level ––––Shared ski-area value
Typical overnight low -4°C-4°C-7°C-6°CShared ski-area value
Rating 8.1/107.7/108.1/107.4/10Shared ski-area value
Area size class 150–250 km250+ km250+ km100–150 kmShared ski-area value
Ability profile advancedintermediateadvancedadvancedShared ski-area value
Price class highlowhighhighShared ski-area value
Terrain and altitude
Marked pistes 175 km275 km322 kmclear advantage142 kmShared ski-area value
Lowest point 1,000 m620 m1,562 m1,472 mShared ski-area value
Highest point 3,842 m1,869 m3,899 m3,573 mShared ski-area value
Vertical range 2,842 mclear advantage1,249 m2,337 m2,101 mShared ski-area value
Blue pistes 34%42%23%22%Shared ski-area value
Red pistes 44%44%68%62%Shared ski-area value
Black pistes 22%clear advantage14%8%16%Shared ski-area value
Terrain above 2,000 m 55%0%92%clear advantage57%Shared ski-area value
Terrain above 3,000 m 0%0%21%clear advantage0%Shared ski-area value
Piste-mix diversity 97/10091/10074/10084/100Shared ski-area value
Slope-angle diversity 86/100clear advantage34/10051/10068/100Shared ski-area value
Very/extremely steep terrain 21%clear advantage1%6%2%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+109% vs average · 92th percentile–Below typical-20% vs average · 23th percentile––
Valley snow versus typical ––Below typical-41% vs average · 57th percentile––
Open slopes versus typical ––Close to typical-21% vs average · 45th percentile––
Current snow
Valley snow 30 cm–19 cm–50 cmclear advantage
Mid-mountain snow 97 cmclear advantage–68 cm–68 cm
Mountain snow 142 cmclear advantage–100 cm–80 cm
Fresh snow 0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm
Snow quality ––9.6/10––
Snow alert 0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm
Open terrain and lifts
Open slopes ––7%––
Open lifts –––––
Lift capacity per piste km 556 pph/km533 pph/km298 pph/km289 pph/kmShared ski-area value
Lift-system coverage 0.48×clear advantage0.27×0.28×0.28×Shared ski-area value
Terrain per lift 2.5 km/lift3.4 km/lift6.3 km/lift3.6 km/liftShared ski-area value
Weather
Minimum temperature 3°C5°C-8°C-1°C5°C
Maximum temperature 10°C11°C-5°C6°C9°C
Suitability and facilities
Family suitability –family–familyShared ski-area value
Piste variety slopesslopesslopesslopesShared ski-area value
Off-piste offpiste–offpiste–Shared ski-area value
Cross-country –crosscountry––Shared ski-area value
Lift network –liftsliftsliftsShared ski-area value
Mountain restaurants –restaurantsrestaurantsrestaurantsShared ski-area value
Après-ski –apresskiapresskiapresskiShared ski-area value
Public transport transittransittransit–Shared ski-area value
Best airport transfer 63 min53 min104 min441 min54 min
Skiing per transfer hour 166 km/h transfer311 km/h transfer186 km/h transfer19 km/h transfer306 km/h transfer