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.

Selected2 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.

2 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

Les Marecottes is the strongest match because of good terrain match · 66/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale, solid reliability match · 60/100 — led by strong snow resilience. Lessinia is the strongest alternative. 2 options remain on the Pareto frontier. 1 option have limited evidence coverage.

Balanced profileSummer / glacier
Recommended

Les Marecottes

64/100
Why
  1. Les Marecottes is the strongest match because of good terrain match · 66/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale, solid reliability match · 60/100 — led by strong snow resilience. Lessinia is the strongest alternative. 2 options remain on the Pareto frontier. 1 option have limited evidence coverage.
Stale evidenceUpdated 1 d ago
  • Structural fit score: 64/100.

Supporting data are stale; treat the ranking as provisional.

AlternativeLessinia
Main uncertaintyMost of the evidence requested by this priority profile is available.
Would change ifFresh observations or stronger source agreement could materially change the ranking.
Stale evidenceUpdated 1 d ago20.0 pts lead
Next
Open webcamsShow on mapInspect forecast
Detailed comparison reasoningEvidence bridge, trade-offs and decision boundaries
Recommended for this profile

Les Marecottes

Terrain-led destinationLow-regret choice

Leads on good terrain match · 66/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale, solid reliability match · 60/100 — led by strong snow resilience.

Why Les Marecottes leads Lessinia Terrain fit +14.5 pts and Snow reliability +5.5 pts
Terrain fit +14.5Snow reliability +5.5
Incoming snow and Weather stay in the forecast layer unless current/forecast evidence is explicitly part of the Decision score.

Strongest alternativeLessinia

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

What could change the resultThe recommendation remains first under the tested nearby priority shifts in the available evidence.

Lead margin20.0pts

Difference between the first and second option.

Ranking stabilityHigh100%

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

Evidence confidence70%

Coverage and coherence of evidence used by this comparison.

Advanced analysisSensitivity, Pareto trade-offs and score contributions
Pareto frontier2 options

No selected option is clearly dominated on the shared evidence.

Why Les Marecottes leads Lessinia · 20.0 pts
Terrain+7.6 pts
Snow+5.5 pts
Lift system+5.0 pts
Family & value+3.4 pts
Scale-1.5 pts

Point contributions reconcile the structural Fit dimensions and confidence-limited current opportunity. Missing evidence is not treated as zero.

Priority sensitivity

The leading resort remains first under moderate one-criterion weighting shifts in the available evidence.

More comparison leadersAdditional category leaders

Resort overview

Trip match is profile-specific. Expand the calculation to see exactly how each score is built.

Les Marecottes

#1 · Les Marecottes Salvan · Switzerland

Decision64/100
Fit64/100
Now0/100
Quality7.8/10
Now00 cm freshReliability6060/100Terrain6666/100
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.

Fit64.4100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision64.4/100
Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow60/100 · 73% evidence 16.3 / 27.3 pts
Terrain80/100 · 80% evidence 20.0 / 25.0 pts
Scale59/100 · 100% evidence 10.7 / 18.2 pts
Lift system50/100 · 68% evidence 8.0 / 15.9 pts
Family & value69/100 · 41% evidence 9.4 / 13.6 pts
AccessNo data excluded

Data coverage: 66%

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 typeTerrain-led destinationBest useAdvanced skiing · 68/100Snow reliabilityHighSki area9 km · 1,110 m verticalTerrain >2,000 m33%Current dataUpdated for selected datePeer group<50 km · Top 2,000–2,799 m
Strengths
  • Good terrain match · 66/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale..
  • Solid reliability match · 60/100 — led by strong snow resilience..

Lessinia

#2 · Lessinia · Italy

Decision44/100
Fit44/100
Now0/100
Quality3.0/10
Now00 cm freshReliability4040/100Terrain4646/100
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.

Fit44.4100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision44.4/100
Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow40/100 · 37% evidence 10.8 / 27.3 pts
Terrain50/100 · 52% evidence 12.4 / 25.0 pts
Scale67/100 · 85% evidence 12.2 / 18.2 pts
Lift system19/100 · 8% evidence 3.0 / 15.9 pts
Family & value44/100 · 28% evidence 6.0 / 13.6 pts
AccessNo data excluded

Data coverage: 38%

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 · 47/100Snow reliabilityLowSki area61 km · 316 m verticalCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group50–149 km · Top <2,000 m
Strengths
  • Mixed terrain match · 46/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence..
  • Mixed reliability match · 40/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence..
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
AttributeLes MarecottesLes Marecottes SalvanLessiniaLessinia
Assessment
Decision score 64/100clear advantage44/100
Structural Fit 64/100clear advantage44/100
Current opportunity 0/1000/100
Overall quality 7.8/10clear advantage3.0/10
Recommendation confidence MediumLow
Ski-area profile
Historical snow reliability 63/100clear advantage17/100
Typical daytime high 4°Cclear advantage8°C
Typical snow/freezing level ––
Typical overnight low -5°Cclear advantage0°C
Rating 6.6/10–
Area size class 20 km or less50–100 km
Ability profile advancedadvanced
Price class highavg
Terrain and altitude
Marked pistes 9 km61 kmclear advantage
Lowest point 1,110 m1,500 mclear advantage
Highest point 2,220 mclear advantage1,816 m
Vertical range 1,110 mclear advantage316 m
Blue pistes 30%14%
Red pistes 56%71%
Black pistes 14%14%
Terrain above 2,000 m 33%–
Terrain above 3,000 m 0%–
Piste-mix diversity 88/100clear advantage72/100
Slope-angle diversity 74/100–
Very/extremely steep terrain 10%–
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 ––
Valley snow versus typical ––
Open slopes versus typical ––
Current snow
Valley snow ––
Mid-mountain snow ––
Mountain snow ––
Fresh snow 0 cm0 cm
Snow quality ––
Snow alert 0 cm0 cm
Open terrain and lifts
Open slopes ––
Open lifts ––
Lift capacity per piste km 502 pph/km–
Lift-system coverage 0.36×–
Terrain per lift 2.3 km/lift15.3 km/lift
Weather
Minimum temperature 7°C11°C
Maximum temperature 11°C18°C
Suitability and facilities
Family suitability ––
Piste variety ––
Off-piste ––
Cross-country ––
Lift network lifts–
Mountain restaurants ––
Après-ski ––
Public transport ––
Best airport transfer ––
Skiing per transfer hour ––