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.

Selected8 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.

8 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 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. Lech am Arlberg is the strongest alternative. 4 options remain on the Pareto frontier.

Balanced profileSummer / glacier
Effectively tied

Chamonix

74/100
Why
  1. 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. Lech am Arlberg is the strongest alternative. 4 options remain on the Pareto frontier.
Mixed evidenceUpdated 11 h ago
  • Strong structural fit for the selected priorities (82/100).
  • Solid upper-mountain snow base at 145 cm.
AlternativeLech am Arlberg
Main uncertaintyThe lead over Lech am Arlberg 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.
Mixed evidenceUpdated 11 h ago2.4 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 choiceEffectively tied

Effectively tied with Lech am Arlberg. 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 Lech am Arlberg Terrain fit +2.3 pts and Access +1.2 pts
Terrain fit +2.3Access +1.2Snow now -0.8Snow reliability -0.2
Incoming snow and Weather stay in the forecast layer unless current/forecast evidence is explicitly part of the Decision score.

Strongest alternativeLech am Arlberg

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

What could change the resultIncrease family & value weight from 12 to 48 and Lech am Arlberg becomes the leading option.

Lead margin2.4pts

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

4 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.

Family & valueLech am Arlberg

Increase family & value weight from 12 to 48 and Lech am Arlberg becomes the leading option.

12 → 48
Why Chamonix leads Lech am Arlberg · 2.4 pts
Lift system+1.9 pts
Access+1.2 pts
Terrain+1.0 pts
Current opportunity-0.8 pts
Family & value-0.7 pts
Snow-0.2 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

Decision74/100
Fit82/100
Now26/100
Quality6.0/10
Now26145 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 Now26.014% weight Decision74.2/100
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 snow30 cm 1.4 / 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 146% 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..

Lech am Arlberg

#2 · Ski Arlberg · Austria

Decision72/100
Fit78/100
Now32/100
Quality9.2/10
Now32125 cm upperReliability7171/100Terrain8282/100Access7489 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.

Fit78.286% weight Now31.714% weight Decision71.8/100
Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow71/100 · 73% evidence 17.1 / 24.0 pts
Terrain81/100 · 80% evidence 17.8 / 22.0 pts
Scale97/100 · 85% evidence 15.6 / 16.0 pts
Lift system61/100 · 68% evidence 8.5 / 14.0 pts
Access74/100 · 68% evidence 8.8 / 12.0 pts
Family & value86/100 · 41% evidence 10.3 / 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 snow125 cm 17.9 / 42.9 pts
Fresh snow0 cm 0.0 / 22.9 pts
Valley snow79 cm 10.0 / 22.9 pts
Mid-mountain snow79 cm 3.8 / 11.4 pts
Open terrainNo data excluded
Snow qualityNo data excluded

Data coverage: 70%

Destination typeLarge-domain explorerBest useAdvanced skiing · 80/100Snow reliabilityExceptionalSki area300 km · 1,507 m verticalTerrain >2,000 m39%Best transfer89 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group150–299 km · Top 2,800+ mCalendar contextMountain snow is 204% above the available five-year level for this point in the season.
Strengths
  • Strong terrain match · 82/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale..
  • Good reliability match · 71/100 — led by strong snow resilience..

Andermatt

#3 · Andermatt Sedrun · Switzerland

Decision67/100
Fit67/100
Now0/100
Quality9.8/10
Now00 cm freshReliability6969/100Terrain6767/100Access6886 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.

Fit67.1100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision67.1/100
Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow69/100 · 73% evidence 16.5 / 24.0 pts
Terrain70/100 · 80% evidence 15.4 / 22.0 pts
Scale79/100 · 100% evidence 12.7 / 16.0 pts
Lift system46/100 · 68% evidence 6.5 / 14.0 pts
Access68/100 · 68% evidence 8.1 / 12.0 pts
Family & value67/100 · 41% evidence 8.0 / 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.

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 typeScale-led destinationBest useAdvanced skiing · 68/100Snow reliabilityVery highSki area70 km · 1,156 m verticalTerrain >2,000 m49%Best transfer86 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group50–149 km · Top 2,000–2,799 m
Strengths
  • Good terrain match · 67/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale..
  • Good reliability match · 69/100 — led by strong snow resilience..
Consider

Lift-system evidence is less convincing.

Crest Voland Cohennoz

#4 · Espace Diamant · France

Decision67/100
Fit67/100
Now0/100
Quality7.0/10
Now00 cm freshReliability5151/100Terrain7171/100Access7381 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.

Fit66.5100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision66.5/100
Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow51/100 · 73% evidence 12.1 / 24.0 pts
Terrain60/100 · 80% evidence 13.1 / 22.0 pts
Scale84/100 · 100% evidence 13.4 / 16.0 pts
Lift system65/100 · 68% evidence 9.1 / 14.0 pts
Access73/100 · 68% evidence 8.8 / 12.0 pts
Family & value83/100 · 41% evidence 9.9 / 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.

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 · 70/100Snow reliabilityVery highSki area192 km · 1,069 m verticalTerrain >2,000 m0%Best transfer81 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group150–299 km · Top 2,000–2,799 m
Strengths
  • Good terrain match · 71/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale..
  • Mixed reliability match · 51/100 — led by strong snow resilience..
Consider

Snow trails the selected-set median by 19 points.

Breuil Cervinia

#5 · Matterhorn Ski Paradise · Italy

Decision64/100
Fit75/100
Now22/100
Quality9.2/10
Now2280 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 Now21.722% weight Decision63.7/100
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 snow80 cm 8.0 / 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 snow30 cm 1.0 / 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 36% 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

#6 · 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.

Arber

#7 · Arber · Germany

Decision54/100
Fit54/100
Now0/100
Quality6.0/10
Now00 cm freshReliability4545/100Terrain6363/100Access28139 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.

Fit54.3100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision54.3/100
Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow45/100 · 37% evidence 10.7 / 24.0 pts
Terrain69/100 · 52% evidence 15.1 / 22.0 pts
Scale41/100 · 85% evidence 6.5 / 16.0 pts
Lift system66/100 · 68% evidence 9.3 / 14.0 pts
Access28/100 · 68% evidence 3.3 / 12.0 pts
Family & value78/100 · 41% evidence 9.4 / 12.0 pts

Data coverage: 57%

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 useAdvanced skiing · 58/100Snow reliabilityModerateSki area12 km · 406 m verticalBest transfer139 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group<50 km · Top <2,000 m
Strengths
  • Solid terrain match · 63/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence..
  • Mixed reliability match · 45/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence..
Consider

Snow resilience is less distinctive.

Zwiesel

#8 · Zwiesel · Germany

Decision30/100
Fit30/100
Now0/100
Quality2.5/10
Now00 cm freshReliability5757/100Terrain1919/100Access32123 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.

Fit29.6100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision29.6/100
Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow57/100 · 73% evidence 13.7 / 24.0 pts
Terrain35/100 · 67% evidence 7.7 / 22.0 pts
Scale16/100 · 85% evidence 2.6 / 16.0 pts
Lift system13/100 · 8% evidence 1.8 / 14.0 pts
Access32/100 · 68% evidence 3.8 / 12.0 pts
Family & value0/100 · 18% evidence 0.0 / 12.0 pts

Data coverage: 57%

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 typeSnow-led destinationBest useSnow-first trips · 38/100Snow reliabilityLowSki area2 km · 180 m verticalTerrain >2,000 m76%Best transfer123 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group<50 km · Top <2,000 m
Strengths
  • Mixed terrain match · 19/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence..
  • Solid reliability match · 57/100 — 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.

Scroll horizontally to compare resortsThe attribute column stays visible
AttributeChamonixChamonix ValleyLech am ArlbergSki ArlbergAndermattAndermatt SedrunCrest Voland CohennozEspace DiamantBreuil CerviniaMatterhorn Ski ParadiseSaasSaastalArberArberZwieselZwiesel
Assessment
Decision score 74/10072/10067/10067/10064/10064/10054/10030/100
Structural Fit 82/10078/10067/10067/10075/10064/10054/10030/100
Current opportunity 26/10032/100clear advantage0/1000/10022/1000/1000/1000/100
Overall quality 6.0/109.2/109.8/10clear advantage7.0/109.2/108.7/106.0/102.5/10
Recommendation confidence MediumMediumMediumMediumMediumMediumMediumMedium
Ski-area profile
Historical snow reliability 68/10091/100clear advantage76/10075/10076/10078/10058/10029/100
Typical daytime high 3°C0°C1°C3°C-2°C1°C2°C4°C
Typical snow/freezing level ––––––––
Typical overnight low -4°C-7°C-6°C-4°C-7°C-6°C-3°C-4°C
Rating 8.1/108.0/107.1/106.8/108.1/107.4/106.1/10–
Area size class 150–250 km250+ km50–100 km150–250 km250+ km100–150 km20 km or less20 km or less
Ability profile advancedintermediateadvancednoviceadvancedadvancedexpertnovice
Price class highhighhighavghighhighavgavg
Terrain and altitude
Marked pistes 175 km300 km70 km192 km322 kmclear advantage142 km12 km2 km
Lowest point 1,000 m1,304 m1,444 m1,000 m1,562 m1,472 m1,050 m570 m
Highest point 3,842 m2,811 m2,600 m2,069 m3,899 m3,573 m1,456 m750 m
Vertical range 2,842 mclear advantage1,507 m1,156 m1,069 m2,337 m2,101 m406 m180 m
Blue pistes 34%43%26%69%23%22%40%0%
Red pistes 44%40%57%26%68%62%29%0%
Black pistes 22%17%17%6%8%16%32%clear advantage0%
Terrain above 2,000 m 55%39%49%0%92%clear advantage57%–76%
Terrain above 3,000 m 0%0%0%0%21%clear advantage0%–9%
Piste-mix diversity 97/10093/10088/10070/10074/10084/10099/100–
Slope-angle diversity 86/100clear advantage58/10038/10036/10051/10068/100–53/100
Very/extremely steep terrain 21%clear advantage7%1%4%6%2%–7%
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+146% vs average · 100th percentileWell above typical+204% vs average · 100th percentile––Well below typical-36% vs average · 4th percentile–––
Valley snow versus typical –Well above typical+568% vs average · 100th percentile––Below typical-40% vs average · 58th percentile–––
Open slopes versus typical ––––Close to typical-20% vs average · 50th percentile–––
Current snow
Valley snow 30 cm79 cmclear advantage––19 cm–––
Mid-mountain snow 30 cm79 cmclear advantage––30 cm–––
Mountain snow 145 cm125 cm––80 cm–––
Fresh snow 0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm
Snow quality ––––9.6/10–––
Snow alert 0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm
Open terrain and lifts
Open slopes ––––7%–––
Open lifts ––––––––
Lift capacity per piste km 556 pph/km487 pph/km410 pph/km495 pph/km298 pph/km289 pph/km899 pph/kmclear advantage–
Lift-system coverage 0.48×clear advantage0.29×0.27×0.35×0.28×0.28×0.31×–
Terrain per lift 2.5 km/lift3.5 km/lift5.4 km/lift2.4 km/lift6.3 km/lift3.6 km/lift2.0 km/lift1.0 km/lift
Weather
Minimum temperature 5°C3°C3°C5°C-7°C2°C2°C0°C
Maximum temperature 12°C8°C7°C14°C-4°C7°C9°C7°C
Suitability and facilities
Family suitability –familyfamilyfamily–familyfamily–
Piste variety slopesslopes–slopesslopesslopes––
Off-piste offpisteoffpiste––offpiste–––
Cross-country ––––––crosscountry–
Lift network –lifts––liftsliftslifts–
Mountain restaurants –restaurants––restaurantsrestaurants––
Après-ski –apresski––apresskiapresski––
Public transport transittransittransittransittransit–––
Best airport transfer 63 min89 min86 min81 min104 min441 min139 min123 min
Skiing per transfer hour 166 km/h transfer202 km/h transfer49 km/h transfer142 km/h transfer186 km/h transfer19 km/h transfer5 km/h transfer1 km/h transfer