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.

Selected3 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.

3 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

Auris en Oisans is the strongest match because of good terrain match · 75/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale, exceptional reliability match · 88/100 — led by strong snow resilience. Alpe dHuez is the strongest alternative. 2 options remain on the Pareto frontier. 1 option have limited evidence coverage.

Balanced profileSummer / glacier
Narrow lead

Auris en Oisans

73/100
Why
  1. Auris en Oisans is the strongest match because of good terrain match · 75/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale, exceptional reliability match · 88/100 — led by strong snow resilience. Alpe dHuez is the strongest alternative. 2 options remain on the Pareto frontier. 1 option have limited evidence coverage.
Mixed evidenceUpdated 16 h ago
  • Strong structural fit for the selected priorities (79/100).
AlternativeAlpe dHuez
Main uncertaintyMost of the evidence requested by this priority profile is available. Some selected resorts share the same Alpe dHuez Grand Domaine ski-area profile.
Would change ifA material forecast shift or a different priority profile could change the ranking.
Mixed evidenceUpdated 16 h ago4.8 pts lead
Next
Open webcamsShow on mapInspect forecast
Detailed comparison reasoningEvidence bridge, trade-offs and decision boundaries
Recommended for this profile

Auris en Oisans

Large-domain explorerLow-regret choiceNarrow lead

Leads on good terrain match · 75/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale, exceptional reliability match · 88/100 — led by strong snow resilience.

Why Auris en Oisans leads Alpe dHuez Terrain fit +2.8 pts and Snow reliability +1.2 pts
Terrain fit +2.8Snow reliability +1.2Access +0.9
Incoming snow and Weather stay in the forecast layer unless current/forecast evidence is explicitly part of the Decision score.

Strongest alternativeAlpe dHuez

Main uncertaintyMost of the evidence requested by this priority profile is available. Some selected resorts share the same Alpe dHuez Grand Domaine ski-area profile.

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

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 confidence74%

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 Auris en Oisans leads Alpe dHuez · 4.8 pts
Snow+1.2 pts
Terrain+1.1 pts
Access+0.9 pts
Scale+0.8 pts
Family & value+0.5 pts
Lift system+0.4 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.

Shared ski-area data: Auris en Oisans, Alpe dHuez share Alpe dHuez Grand Domaine. Permanent profile values are identical; current local observations may differ.

Auris en Oisans

#1 · Alpe dHuez Grand Domaine · France

Decision73/100
Fit79/100
Now4/100
Quality7.7/10
Now420 cm upperReliability8888/100Terrain7575/100Access8076 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.

Fit78.992% weight Now4.38% weight Decision72.9/100
Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow88/100 · 73% evidence 21.1 / 24.0 pts
Terrain86/100 · 80% evidence 18.8 / 22.0 pts
Scale90/100 · 100% evidence 14.4 / 16.0 pts
Lift system47/100 · 68% evidence 6.6 / 14.0 pts
Access80/100 · 68% evidence 9.6 / 12.0 pts
Family & value70/100 · 41% evidence 8.4 / 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 snow20 cm 4.3 / 65.2 pts
Fresh snow0 cm 0.0 / 34.8 pts
Mid-mountain snowNo data excluded
Open terrainNo data excluded
Snow qualityNo data excluded
Valley snowNo data excluded

Data coverage: 46%

Destination typeLarge-domain explorerBest useSnow-first trips · 82/100Snow reliabilityExceptionalSki area250 km · 2,205 m verticalTerrain >2,000 m55%Best transfer76 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group150–299 km · Top 2,800+ m
Strengths
  • Good terrain match · 75/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale..
  • Exceptional reliability match · 88/100 — led by strong snow resilience..
Consider

Lift-system evidence is less convincing.

Alpe dHuez

#2 · Alpe dHuez Grand Domaine · France

Decision68/100
Fit79/100
Now3/100
Quality7.7/10
Now315 cm upperReliability8888/100Terrain7575/100Access7782 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.

Fit78.586% weight Now2.614% weight Decision68.1/100
Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow88/100 · 73% evidence 21.1 / 24.0 pts
Terrain86/100 · 80% evidence 18.8 / 22.0 pts
Scale90/100 · 100% evidence 14.4 / 16.0 pts
Lift system47/100 · 68% evidence 6.6 / 14.0 pts
Access77/100 · 68% evidence 9.2 / 12.0 pts
Family & value70/100 · 41% evidence 8.4 / 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 snow15 cm 2.1 / 42.9 pts
Fresh snow0 cm 0.0 / 22.9 pts
Valley snow0 cm 0.0 / 22.9 pts
Mid-mountain snow9 cm 0.4 / 11.4 pts
Open terrainNo data excluded
Snow qualityNo data excluded

Data coverage: 70%

Destination typeLarge-domain explorerBest useSnow-first trips · 81/100Snow reliabilityExceptionalSki area250 km · 2,205 m verticalTerrain >2,000 m55%Best transfer82 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group150–299 km · Top 2,800+ mCalendar contextMountain snow is 72% below the available five-year level for this point in the season.
Strengths
  • Good terrain match · 75/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale..
  • Exceptional reliability match · 88/100 — led by strong snow resilience..
Consider

Lift-system evidence is less convincing.

Allemond

#3 · · France

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.

Scroll horizontally to compare resortsThe attribute column stays visible
AttributeAuris en OisansAlpe dHuez Grand DomaineAlpe dHuezAlpe dHuez Grand DomaineAllemondFrance
Assessment
Decision score 73/100clear advantage68/100–
Structural Fit 79/10079/100–
Current opportunity 4/1003/100–
Overall quality 7.7/10Shared ski-area value–
Recommendation confidence MediumMediumLow
Ski-area profile
Historical snow reliability 82/100Shared ski-area value–
Typical daytime high 2°CShared ski-area value–
Typical snow/freezing level –Shared ski-area value–
Typical overnight low -4°CShared ski-area value–
Rating 7.2/10Shared ski-area value–
Area size class 150–250 kmShared ski-area value–
Ability profile advancedShared ski-area value–
Price class highShared ski-area value–
Terrain and altitude
Marked pistes 250 kmShared ski-area value–
Lowest point 1,125 mShared ski-area value–
Highest point 3,330 mShared ski-area value–
Vertical range 2,205 mShared ski-area value–
Blue pistes 28%Shared ski-area value–
Red pistes 52%Shared ski-area value–
Black pistes 20%Shared ski-area value–
Terrain above 2,000 m 55%Shared ski-area value–
Terrain above 3,000 m 2%Shared ski-area value–
Piste-mix diversity 93/100Shared ski-area value–
Slope-angle diversity 68/100Shared ski-area value–
Very/extremely steep terrain 12%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 below typical-72% vs average · 17th percentile–
Valley snow versus typical –––
Open slopes versus typical –––
Current snow
Valley snow –0 cm–
Mid-mountain snow –9 cm–
Mountain snow 20 cm15 cm–
Fresh snow 0 cm0 cm–
Snow quality –––
Snow alert 0 cm0 cm0 cm
Open terrain and lifts
Open slopes –––
Open lifts –––
Lift capacity per piste km 440 pph/kmShared ski-area value–
Lift-system coverage 0.24×Shared ski-area value–
Terrain per lift 3.6 km/liftShared ski-area value–
Weather
Minimum temperature 7°C7°C10°C
Maximum temperature 18°C15°C20°C
Suitability and facilities
Family suitability familyShared ski-area value–
Piste variety slopesShared ski-area value–
Off-piste offpisteShared ski-area value–
Cross-country –Shared ski-area value–
Lift network –Shared ski-area value–
Mountain restaurants restaurantsShared ski-area value–
Après-ski apresskiShared ski-area value–
Public transport transitShared ski-area value–
Best airport transfer 76 min82 min–
Skiing per transfer hour 197 km/h transfer183 km/h transfer–