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 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. Valmalenco is the strongest alternative. 3 options remain on the Pareto frontier. 2 options have limited evidence coverage.

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. Valmalenco is the strongest alternative. 3 options remain on the Pareto frontier. 2 options have limited evidence coverage.
Mixed evidenceUpdated 23 h ago
  • Strong structural fit for the selected priorities (82/100).
  • Solid upper-mountain snow base at 145 cm.
AlternativeValmalenco
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 23 h ago5.5 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 Valmalenco Access +8.8 pts and Snow now +4.0 pts
Access +8.8Snow reliability -4.5Snow now +4.0Terrain fit -2.7
Incoming snow and Weather stay in the forecast layer unless current/forecast evidence is explicitly part of the Decision score.

Strongest alternativeValmalenco

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

What could change the resultIncrease family & value weight from 12 to 100 and Norefjell becomes the leading option.

Lead margin5.5pts

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 frontier3 options

5 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 & valueNorefjell

Increase family & value weight from 12 to 100 and Norefjell becomes the leading option.

12 → 100
Why Chamonix leads Valmalenco · 5.5 pts
Access+8.8 pts
Snow-4.5 pts
Current opportunity+4.0 pts
Terrain-3.4 pts
Scale+2.4 pts
Lift system-1.9 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..

Valmalenco

#2 · Valmalenco · Italy

Decision69/100
Fit69/100
Now0/100
Quality–/10
Now00 cm freshReliability7070/100Terrain6969/100
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.

Fit69.2100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision69.2/100
Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow70/100 · 37% evidence 19.1 / 27.3 pts
Terrain79/100 · 44% evidence 19.8 / 25.0 pts
Scale62/100 · 85% evidence 11.2 / 18.2 pts
Lift system70/100 · 68% evidence 11.1 / 15.9 pts
Family & value59/100 · 41% evidence 8.0 / 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 typeAdvanced-terrain specialistBest useAdvanced skiing · 72/100Snow reliabilityModerateSki area21 km · 826 m verticalCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group<50 km · Top 2,000–2,799 m
Strengths
  • Good terrain match · 69/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence..
  • Good reliability match · 70/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence..
Consider

Scale trails the selected-set median by 21 points.

Nauders

#3 · Nauders · Austria

Decision67/100
Fit67/100
Now9/100
Quality8.5/10
Now90 cm freshReliability7070/100Terrain6565/100Access6985 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.

Fit66.6100% weight Now8.80% weight Decision66.6/100
Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow70/100 · 73% evidence 16.8 / 24.0 pts
Terrain70/100 · 80% evidence 15.5 / 22.0 pts
Scale91/100 · 100% evidence 14.5 / 16.0 pts
Lift system18/100 · 68% evidence 2.5 / 14.0 pts
Access69/100 · 68% evidence 8.3 / 12.0 pts
Family & value76/100 · 41% evidence 9.1 / 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 / 61.5 pts
Snow quality2.3/10 8.8 / 38.5 pts
Mid-mountain snowNo data excluded
Mountain snowNo data excluded
Open terrainNo data excluded
Valley snowNo data excluded

Data coverage: 26%

Destination typeLarge-domain explorerBest useAdvanced skiing · 68/100Snow reliabilityVery highSki area75 km · 1,350 m verticalTerrain >2,000 m57%Best transfer85 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group50–149 km · Top 2,000–2,799 m
Strengths
  • Good terrain match · 65/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale..
  • Good reliability match · 70/100 — led by strong snow resilience..
Consider

Lift-system evidence is less convincing.

Breuil Cervinia

#4 · 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

#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.

Norefjell

#6 · Norefjell · Norway

Decision62/100
Fit62/100
Now0/100
Quality–/10
Now00 cm freshReliability4141/100Terrain7171/100
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.

Fit62.4100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision62.4/100
Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow41/100 · 37% evidence 11.1 / 27.3 pts
Terrain63/100 · 44% evidence 15.8 / 25.0 pts
Scale71/100 · 100% evidence 12.9 / 18.2 pts
Lift system69/100 · 68% evidence 11.0 / 15.9 pts
Family & value85/100 · 41% evidence 11.6 / 13.6 pts
AccessNo data excluded

Data coverage: 49%

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 · 68/100Snow reliabilityHighSki area25 km · 1,010 m verticalCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group<50 km · Top <2,000 m
Strengths
  • Good terrain match · 71/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence..
  • Mixed reliability match · 41/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence..
Consider

Snow resilience is less distinctive.

Montecampione

#7 · Montecampione · Italy

Decision54/100
Fit54/100
Now0/100
Quality4.0/10
Now00 cm freshReliability3939/100Terrain5656/100Access7673 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.

Fit54.4100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision54.4/100
Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow39/100 · 73% evidence 9.3 / 24.0 pts
Terrain61/100 · 80% evidence 13.5 / 22.0 pts
Scale61/100 · 100% evidence 9.8 / 16.0 pts
Lift system49/100 · 68% evidence 6.9 / 14.0 pts
Access76/100 · 68% evidence 9.1 / 12.0 pts
Family & value48/100 · 41% evidence 5.7 / 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.

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 typeAccess-led destinationBest useShort breaks · 56/100Snow reliabilityLowSki area30 km · 692 m verticalTerrain >2,000 m0%Best transfer73 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group<50 km · Top <2,000 m
Strengths
  • Solid terrain match · 56/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale..
  • Mixed reliability match · 39/100 — led by strong snow resilience..
Consider

Snow resilience is less distinctive.

Macugnaga

#8 · Macugnaga Monte Rosa · Italy

Decision53/100
Fit53/100
Now0/100
Quality8.8/10
Now00 cm freshReliability5656/100Terrain5656/100Access35141 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.

Fit53.0100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision53.0/100
Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow56/100 · 73% evidence 13.4 / 24.0 pts
Terrain60/100 · 80% evidence 13.2 / 22.0 pts
Scale73/100 · 100% evidence 11.7 / 16.0 pts
Lift system25/100 · 68% evidence 3.5 / 14.0 pts
Access35/100 · 68% evidence 4.2 / 12.0 pts
Family & value59/100 · 41% evidence 7.1 / 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 · 56/100Snow reliabilityHighSki area32 km · 1,553 m verticalTerrain >2,000 m0%Best transfer141 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group<50 km · Top 2,800+ m
Strengths
  • Solid terrain match · 56/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale..
  • Solid reliability match · 56/100 — led by strong snow resilience..
Consider

Lift-system evidence is less convincing.

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 ValleyValmalencoValmalencoNaudersNaudersBreuil CerviniaMatterhorn Ski ParadiseSaasSaastalNorefjellNorefjellMontecampioneMontecampioneMacugnagaMacugnaga Monte Rosa
Assessment
Decision score 75/100clear advantage69/10067/10064/10064/10062/10054/10053/100
Structural Fit 82/100clear advantage69/10067/10075/10064/10062/10054/10053/100
Current opportunity 29/100clear advantage0/1009/10022/1000/1000/1000/1000/100
Overall quality 6.0/10–8.5/109.2/10clear advantage8.7/10–4.0/108.8/10
Recommendation confidence MediumLowMediumMediumMediumLowMediumMedium
Ski-area profile
Historical snow reliability 68/10060/10072/10076/10078/10067/10023/10061/100
Typical daytime high 3°C3°C0°C-2°C1°C-1°C5°C1°C
Typical snow/freezing level ––––––––
Typical overnight low -4°C-6°C-8°C-7°C-6°C-4°C-2°C-5°C
Rating 8.1/106.4/107.4/108.1/107.4/107.0/106.0/107.0/10
Area size class 150–250 km20–50 km50–100 km250+ km100–150 km20–50 km20–50 km20–50 km
Ability profile advancedadvancedadvancedadvancedadvancedintermediateadvancedadvanced
Price class high–avghighhigh–avglow
Terrain and altitude
Marked pistes 175 km21 km75 km322 kmclear advantage142 km25 km30 km32 km
Lowest point 1,000 m1,527 m1,400 m1,562 m1,472 m178 m1,149 m1,347 m
Highest point 3,842 m2,353 m2,750 m3,899 m3,573 m1,188 m1,841 m2,900 m
Vertical range 2,842 mclear advantage826 m1,350 m2,337 m2,101 m1,010 m692 m1,553 m
Blue pistes 34%19%33%23%22%68%12%22%
Red pistes 44%57%48%68%62%20%70%69%
Black pistes 22%24%19%8%16%12%18%9%
Terrain above 2,000 m 55%–57%92%clear advantage57%–0%0%
Terrain above 3,000 m 0%–0%21%clear advantage0%–0%0%
Piste-mix diversity 97/10089/10094/10074/10084/10076/10074/10074/100
Slope-angle diversity 86/100clear advantage–37/10051/10068/100–60/10036/100
Very/extremely steep terrain 21%clear advantage–1%6%2%–2%0%
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––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––75 cm––––
Fresh snow 0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm
Snow quality ––2.3/109.6/10clear advantage––––
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/km682 pph/km241 pph/km298 pph/km289 pph/km680 pph/km505 pph/km244 pph/km
Lift-system coverage 0.48×0.46×0.19×0.28×0.28×0.40×0.28×0.26×
Terrain per lift 2.5 km/lift2.4 km/lift6.8 km/lift6.3 km/lift3.6 km/lift1.7 km/lift3.0 km/lift3.6 km/lift
Weather
Minimum temperature 4°C0°C1°C1°C1°C-4°C3°C-3°C
Maximum temperature 11°C9°C9°C9°C6°C1°C10°C2°C
Suitability and facilities
Family suitability ––family–family–––
Piste variety slopes––slopesslopes–––
Off-piste offpiste––offpiste––––
Cross-country ––––––––
Lift network ––liftsliftslifts–––
Mountain restaurants –––restaurantsrestaurants–––
Après-ski –––apresskiapresski–––
Public transport transit–transittransit––transit–
Best airport transfer 63 min–85 min104 min441 min–73 min141 min
Skiing per transfer hour 166 km/h transfer–53 km/h transfer186 km/h transfer19 km/h transfer–25 km/h transfer14 km/h transfer