Compare ski resorts

Recommendation

Decision summary

Belalp is the strongest match because of good terrain match · 73/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale, exceptional reliability match · 88/100 — led by strong snow resilience. Arosa is the strongest alternative. 2 options remain on the Pareto frontier.

Effectively tied

Belalp

72/100

Why

Belalp is the strongest match because of good terrain match · 73/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale, exceptional reliability match · 88/100 — led by strong snow resilience. Arosa is the strongest alternative. 2 options remain on the Pareto frontier.

Limited evidenceUpdated 21 h ago

Structural fit score: 72/100.

Evidence coverage is limited; the ranking may move with new observations.

AlternativeArosa

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.

Detailed comparison reasoningEvidence bridge, trade-offs and decision boundaries

Recommended for this profile

Belalp

Advanced-terrain specialistLow-regret choiceEffectively tied

Effectively tied with Arosa. good terrain match · 73/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale, exceptional reliability match · 88/100 — led by strong snow resilience.

Why Belalp leads Arosa Snow reliability +4.0 pts and Terrain fit +0.7 pts

Snow reliability +4.0Access -1.6Terrain fit +0.7

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

Strongest alternativeArosa

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

What could change the resultReduce snow weight from 24 to 5 and Arosa becomes the leading option.

Lead margin3.2pts

Difference between the first and second option.

Ranking stabilityHigh100%

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

Evidence confidence77%

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.

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.

SnowArosa

Reduce snow weight from 24 to 5 and Arosa becomes the leading option.

24 → 5

AccessArosa

Increase access weight from 12 to 36 and Arosa becomes the leading option.

12 → 36

ScaleArosa

Increase scale weight from 16 to 41 and Arosa becomes the leading option.

16 → 41

Family & valueArosa

Increase family & value weight from 12 to 58 and Arosa becomes the leading option.

12 → 58

Why Belalp leads Arosa · 3.2 pts

Snow+4.0 pts

Scale-2.0 pts

Terrain+1.9 pts

Lift system+1.7 pts

Access-1.6 pts

Family & value-0.9 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.

Belalp

#1 · Belalp Blatten Naters · Switzerland

Decision72/100

Fit72/100

Now0/100

Quality8.4/10

Now00 cm freshReliability8888/100Terrain7373/100Access31149 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.

Fit71.9100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision71.9/100

Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow88/100 · 73% evidence 21.2 / 24.0 pts

Terrain83/100 · 80% evidence 18.2 / 22.0 pts

Scale85/100 · 100% evidence 13.6 / 16.0 pts

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

Access31/100 · 68% evidence 3.8 / 12.0 pts

Family & value81/100 · 41% evidence 9.7 / 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 typeAdvanced-terrain specialistBest useSnow-first trips · 78/100Snow reliabilityHighSki area38 km · 1,796 m verticalTerrain >2,000 m77%Best transfer149 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group<50 km · Top 2,800+ m

Strengths

Good terrain match · 73/100 — 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.

Arosa

#2 · Arosa Lenzerheide · Switzerland

Decision69/100

Fit69/100

Now0/100

Quality9.2/10

Now00 cm freshReliability7272/100Terrain7272/100Access45129 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.

Fit68.7100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision68.7/100

Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow72/100 · 73% evidence 17.2 / 24.0 pts

Terrain74/100 · 80% evidence 16.3 / 22.0 pts

Scale98/100 · 85% evidence 15.6 / 16.0 pts

Lift system26/100 · 68% evidence 3.7 / 14.0 pts

Access45/100 · 68% evidence 5.4 / 12.0 pts

Family & value88/100 · 41% evidence 10.6 / 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 · 72/100Snow reliabilityExceptionalSki area225 km · 1,636 m verticalTerrain >2,000 m48%Best transfer129 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group150–299 km · Top 2,800+ m

Strengths

Good terrain match · 72/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale..
Good reliability match · 72/100 — 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.

Find column

Scroll horizontally to compare resortsThe attribute column stays visible

Attribute	BelalpBelalp Blatten Naters	ArosaArosa Lenzerheide
Assessment
Decision score	72/100	69/100
Structural Fit	72/100	69/100
Current opportunity	0/100	0/100
Overall quality	8.4/10	9.2/10clear advantage
Recommendation confidence	Medium	Medium
Ski-area profile
Historical snow reliability	70/100	86/100clear advantage
Typical daytime high	0°C	1°C
Typical snow/freezing level	–	–
Typical overnight low	-7°C	-7°C
Rating	7.0/10	7.5/10clear advantage
Area size class	20–50 km	150–250 km
Ability profile	expert	intermediate
Price class	high	high
Terrain and altitude
Marked pistes	38 km	225 kmclear advantage
Lowest point	1,322 m	1,229 m
Highest point	3,118 mclear advantage	2,865 m
Vertical range	1,796 mclear advantage	1,636 m
Blue pistes	40%	49%
Red pistes	32%	39%
Black pistes	29%clear advantage	12%
Terrain above 2,000 m	77%clear advantage	48%
Terrain above 3,000 m	3%	0%
Piste-mix diversity	99/100clear advantage	89/100
Slope-angle diversity	50/100	45/100
Very/extremely steep terrain	6%	4%
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 cm	0 cm
Snow quality	–	–
Snow alert	0 cm	0 cm
Open terrain and lifts
Open slopes	–	–
Open lifts	–	–
Lift capacity per piste km	366 pph/kmclear advantage	288 pph/km
Lift-system coverage	0.28×	0.22×
Terrain per lift	2.9 km/lift	5.2 km/lift
Weather
Minimum temperature	2°C	6°C
Maximum temperature	7°C	15°C
Suitability and facilities
Family suitability	–	family
Piste variety	–	slopes
Off-piste	–	–
Cross-country	–	–
Lift network	–	lifts
Mountain restaurants	–	restaurants
Après-ski	–	–
Public transport	–	–
Best airport transfer	149 min	129 minclear advantage
Skiing per transfer hour	15 km/h transfer	105 km/h transferclear advantage

Shape the comparison

Start a comparison

Decision summary

Belalp

Belalp

Resort overview

Belalp

Arosa

Detailed comparison