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.

Selected9 of 10

ProfileBalanced

ModeStructural

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. Saint Chaffrey is the strongest alternative. 6 options remain on the Pareto frontier. 4 options have limited evidence coverage.

Effectively tied

Chamonix

75/100

Why

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. Saint Chaffrey is the strongest alternative. 6 options remain on the Pareto frontier. 4 options have limited evidence coverage.

Mixed evidenceUpdated 19 h ago

Strong structural fit for the selected priorities (82/100).
Solid upper-mountain snow base at 142 cm.

AlternativeSaint Chaffrey

Main uncertaintyThe lead over Saint Chaffrey 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.

Open webcams Show on map Inspect forecast

Detailed comparison reasoningEvidence bridge, trade-offs and decision boundaries

Recommended for this profile

Chamonix

Advanced-terrain specialistLow-regret choiceEffectively tied

Effectively tied with Saint Chaffrey. 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 Saint Chaffrey Access +8.8 pts and Snow now +3.9 pts

Access +8.8Terrain fit -6.0Snow reliability -4.9Snow now +3.9

Incoming snow and Weather stay in the forecast layer unless current/forecast evidence is explicitly part of the Decision score.

Strongest alternativeSaint Chaffrey

Main uncertaintyThe lead over Saint Chaffrey is small. Most of the evidence requested by this priority profile is available.

What could change the resultReduce lift system weight from 14 to 9 and Saint Chaffrey becomes the leading option.

Lead margin1.7pts

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 frontier6 options

2 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.

Lift systemSaint Chaffrey

Reduce lift system weight from 14 to 9 and Saint Chaffrey becomes the leading option.

14 → 9

Family & valueSaint Chaffrey

Increase family & value weight from 12 to 22 and Saint Chaffrey becomes the leading option.

12 → 22

SnowGarmisch Partenkirchen

Reduce snow weight from 24 to 6 and Garmisch Partenkirchen becomes the leading option.

24 → 6

AccessGarmisch Partenkirchen

Increase access weight from 12 to 45 and Garmisch Partenkirchen becomes the leading option.

12 → 45

Why Chamonix leads Saint Chaffrey · 1.7 pts

Access+8.8 pts

Snow-4.9 pts

Family & value-3.9 pts

Current opportunity+3.9 pts

Lift system+3.4 pts

Terrain-3.0 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

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 Decision74.7/100

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 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..

Saint Chaffrey

#2 · Serre Chevalier · France

Decision73/100

Fit73/100

Now–/100

Quality8.2/10

Reliability7272/100Terrain7474/100

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.

Fit73.0100% weight Now–0% weight Decision73.0/100

Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow72/100 · 37% evidence 19.5 / 27.3 pts

Terrain78/100 · 52% evidence 19.4 / 25.0 pts

Scale89/100 · 100% evidence 16.1 / 18.2 pts

Lift system36/100 · 68% evidence 5.8 / 15.9 pts

Family & value89/100 · 41% evidence 12.1 / 13.6 pts

AccessNo data excluded

Data coverage: 51%

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 typeLarge-domain explorerBest useAdvanced skiing · 75/100Snow reliabilityMarginalSki area250 km · 1,600 m verticalCurrent dataNo current updatePeer group150–299 km · Top 2,800+ m

Strengths

Good terrain match · 74/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence..
Good reliability match · 72/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence..

Consider

Lift-system evidence is less convincing.

Garmisch Partenkirchen

#3 · Garmisch Partenkirchen · Germany

Decision73/100

Fit73/100

Now0/100

Quality6.5/10

Now00 cm freshReliability5454/100Terrain7878/100Access8362 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.

Fit72.9100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision72.9/100

Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow54/100 · 73% evidence 13.0 / 24.0 pts

Terrain73/100 · 80% evidence 16.0 / 22.0 pts

Scale90/100 · 85% evidence 14.4 / 16.0 pts

Lift system80/100 · 68% evidence 11.2 / 14.0 pts

Access83/100 · 68% evidence 9.9 / 12.0 pts

Family & value70/100 · 41% evidence 8.4 / 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 useShort breaks · 74/100Snow reliabilityHighSki area61 km · 1,920 m verticalTerrain >2,000 m0%Best transfer62 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group50–149 km · Top 2,000–2,799 m

Strengths

Strong terrain match · 78/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale..
Solid reliability match · 54/100 — led by strong snow resilience..

Consider

Snow trails the selected-set median by 14 points.

Breuil Cervinia

#4 · 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

#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.

Fellhorn

#6 · Walmendingerhorn Ifen Heuberg · Germany

Decision62/100

Fit62/100

Now0/100

Quality6.8/10

Now00 cm freshReliability5050/100Terrain6262/100Access8756 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.

Fit62.1100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision62.1/100

Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow50/100 · 73% evidence 11.9 / 24.0 pts

Terrain56/100 · 80% evidence 12.3 / 22.0 pts

Scale74/100 · 100% evidence 11.9 / 16.0 pts

Lift system39/100 · 68% evidence 5.4 / 14.0 pts

Access87/100 · 68% evidence 10.5 / 12.0 pts

Family & value85/100 · 41% evidence 10.2 / 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 · 67/100Snow reliabilityVery highSki area34 km · 876 m verticalTerrain >2,000 m0%Best transfer56 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group<50 km · Top <2,000 m

Strengths

Solid terrain match · 62/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale..
Mixed reliability match · 50/100 — led by strong snow resilience..

Consider

Lift-system evidence is less convincing.

Mitterdorf

#7 · Mitterdorf · Germany

Decision50/100

Fit50/100

Now0/100

Quality–/10

Now00 cm freshReliability3434/100Terrain5656/100

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.

Fit50.1100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision50.1/100

Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow34/100 · 37% evidence 9.2 / 27.3 pts

Terrain54/100 · 44% evidence 13.6 / 25.0 pts

Scale31/100 · 100% evidence 5.7 / 18.2 pts

Lift system62/100 · 8% evidence 9.9 / 15.9 pts

Family & value86/100 · 41% evidence 11.8 / 13.6 pts

AccessNo data excluded

Data coverage: 41%

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 · 60/100Snow reliabilityMarginalSki area6 km · 298 m verticalCurrent 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; partial evidence..
Mixed reliability match · 34/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence..

Consider

Snow resilience is less distinctive.

Pontresina

#8 · Pontresina · Switzerland

Decision46/100

Fit46/100

Now0/100

Quality9.0/10

Now00 cm freshReliability6565/100Terrain4545/100Access14155 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.

Fit46.3100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision46.3/100

Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow65/100 · 37% evidence 15.6 / 24.0 pts

Terrain21/100 · 39% evidence 4.6 / 22.0 pts

Scale13/100 · 100% evidence 2.1 / 16.0 pts

Lift system86/100 · 68% evidence 12.0 / 14.0 pts

Access14/100 · 68% evidence 1.6 / 12.0 pts

Family & value86/100 · 31% evidence 10.4 / 12.0 pts

Data coverage: 55%

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 · 57/100Snow reliabilityVery highSki area1 km · 90 m verticalBest transfer155 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group<50 km · Top <2,000 m

Strengths

Mixed terrain match · 45/100 — led by strong lift-system evidence and strong terrain profile; partial evidence..
Good reliability match · 65/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence..

Consider

Terrain depth is less distinctive.

Kamenz

#9 · · 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 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	ChamonixChamonix Valley	Saint ChaffreySerre Chevalier	Garmisch PartenkirchenGarmisch Partenkirchen	Breuil CerviniaMatterhorn Ski Paradise	SaasSaastal	FellhornWalmendingerhorn Ifen Heuberg	MitterdorfMitterdorf	PontresinaPontresina	KamenzGermany
Assessment
Decision score	75/100	73/100	73/100	65/100	64/100	62/100	50/100	46/100	–
Structural Fit	82/100clear advantage	73/100	73/100	75/100	64/100	62/100	50/100	46/100	–
Current opportunity	29/100	–	0/100	25/100	0/100	0/100	0/100	0/100	–
Overall quality	6.0/10	8.2/10	6.5/10	9.2/10	8.7/10	6.8/10	–	9.0/10	–
Recommendation confidence	Medium	Low	Medium	Medium	Medium	Medium	Low	Low	Low
Ski-area profile
Historical snow reliability	68/100	49/100	65/100	76/100	78/100	78/100	48/100	72/100	–
Typical daytime high	3°C	3°C	1°C	-2°C	1°C	3°C	4°C	-1°C	–
Typical snow/freezing level	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
Typical overnight low	-4°C	-5°C	-5°C	-7°C	-6°C	-4°C	-3°C	-10°Cclear advantage	–
Rating	8.1/10	7.5/10	7.8/10	8.1/10	7.4/10	6.8/10	6.4/10	6.8/10	–
Area size class	150–250 km	150–250 km	50–100 km	250+ km	100–150 km	20–50 km	20 km or less	20 km or less	–
Ability profile	advanced	intermediate	advanced	advanced	advanced	novice	intermediate	novice	–
Price class	high	low	avg	high	high	avg	low	high	–
Terrain and altitude
Marked pistes	175 km	250 km	61 km	322 kmclear advantage	142 km	34 km	6 km	1 km	–
Lowest point	1,000 m	1,200 m	730 m	1,562 m	1,472 m	1,070 m	841 m	1,830 mclear advantage	–
Highest point	3,842 m	2,800 m	2,650 m	3,899 m	3,573 m	1,946 m	1,139 m	1,920 m	–
Vertical range	2,842 mclear advantage	1,600 m	1,920 m	2,337 m	2,101 m	876 m	298 m	90 m	–
Blue pistes	34%	55%	26%	23%	22%	58%	55%	100%	–
Red pistes	44%	32%	56%	68%	62%	35%	28%	0%	–
Black pistes	22%	13%	17%	8%	16%	7%	17%	0%	–
Terrain above 2,000 m	55%	–	0%	92%clear advantage	57%	0%	–	–	–
Terrain above 3,000 m	0%	–	0%	21%clear advantage	0%	0%	–	–	–
Piste-mix diversity	97/100	87/100	89/100	74/100	84/100	79/100	90/100	–	–
Slope-angle diversity	86/100clear advantage	–	47/100	51/100	68/100	45/100	–	–	–
Very/extremely steep terrain	21%clear advantage	–	2%	6%	2%	1%	–	–	–
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+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	–	–	–	–	–
Mid-mountain snow	97 cmclear advantage	–	–	68 cm	–	–	–	–	–
Mountain snow	142 cmclear advantage	–	–	100 cm	–	–	–	–	–
Fresh snow	0 cm	–	0 cm	0 cm	0 cm	0 cm	0 cm	0 cm	–
Snow quality	–	–	–	9.6/10	–	–	–	–	–
Snow alert	0 cm	–	0 cm	0 cm	0 cm	0 cm	0 cm	0 cm	0 cm
Open terrain and lifts
Open slopes	–	–	–	7%	–	–	–	–	–
Open lifts	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
Lift capacity per piste km	556 pph/km	327 pph/km	597 pph/km	298 pph/km	289 pph/km	384 pph/km	–	5,950 pph/kmclear advantage	–
Lift-system coverage	0.48×	0.24×	0.86×clear advantage	0.28×	0.28×	0.26×	–	0.50×	–
Terrain per lift	2.5 km/lift	4.2 km/lift	2.1 km/lift	6.3 km/lift	3.6 km/lift	2.6 km/lift	0.8 km/lift	0.2 km/lift	–
Weather
Minimum temperature	3°C	–	5°C	-8°C	4°C	-3°C	0°C	-2°C	7°C
Maximum temperature	12°C	–	14°C	-5°C	11°C	7°C	9°C	4°C	12°C
Suitability and facilities
Family suitability	–	–	–	–	family	–	–	–	–
Piste variety	slopes	slopes	–	slopes	slopes	–	–	–	–
Off-piste	offpiste	–	–	offpiste	–	–	–	–	–
Cross-country	–	crosscountry	–	–	–	–	–	crosscountry	–
Lift network	–	lifts	lifts	lifts	lifts	–	–	–	–
Mountain restaurants	–	–	–	restaurants	restaurants	–	–	–	–
Après-ski	–	–	–	apresski	apresski	–	–	–	–
Public transport	transit	–	transit	transit	–	–	–	–	–
Best airport transfer	63 min	–	62 min	104 min	441 min	56 min	–	155 min	–
Skiing per transfer hour	166 km/h transfer	–	59 km/h transfer	186 km/h transfer	19 km/h transfer	36 km/h transfer	–	0 km/h transfer	–

Compare ski resorts

Shape the comparison

Start a comparison

Decision summary

Chamonix

Chamonix

Resort overview

Chamonix

Saint Chaffrey

Garmisch Partenkirchen

Breuil Cervinia

Saas

Fellhorn

Mitterdorf

Pontresina

Kamenz

Detailed comparison