Compare ski resorts

Recommendation

Decision summary

Diavolezza narrowly leads because of solid terrain match · 56/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence, exceptional reliability match · 86/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence. Sils Maria is the strongest alternative. 2 options have limited evidence coverage.

Effectively tied

Diavolezza

65/100

Why

Diavolezza narrowly leads because of solid terrain match · 56/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence, exceptional reliability match · 86/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence. Sils Maria is the strongest alternative. 2 options have limited evidence coverage.

Limited evidenceUpdated 17 h ago

Structural fit score: 65/100.

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

AlternativeSils Maria

Main uncertaintyThe lead over Sils Maria is small. Some requested evidence is unavailable; the score is rescaled over the evidence that exists.

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

Diavolezza

Advanced-terrain specialistLow-regret choiceEffectively tied

Effectively tied with Sils Maria. solid terrain match · 56/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence, exceptional reliability match · 86/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence—but the result is close.

Why Diavolezza leads Sils Maria Snow reliability +2.3 pts and Terrain fit +1.3 pts

Access -3.5Snow reliability +2.3Terrain fit +1.3

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

Strongest alternativeSils Maria

Main uncertaintyThe lead over Sils Maria is small. Some requested evidence is unavailable; the score is rescaled over the evidence that exists.

What could change the resultReduce access weight from 12 to 11 and Sils Maria becomes the leading option.

Lead margin0.1pts

Difference between the first and second option.

Ranking stabilityHigh100%

The ranking changes little under nearby priority weights. Rank range 1–2.

Evidence confidence57%

Coverage and coherence of evidence used by this comparison.

Advanced analysisSensitivity, Pareto trade-offs and score contributions

Pareto frontier1 option

1 option is 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.

AccessSils Maria

Reduce access weight from 12 to 11 and Sils Maria becomes the leading option.

12 → 11

ScaleSils Maria

Increase scale weight from 16 to 17 and Sils Maria becomes the leading option.

16 → 17

Family & valueSils Maria

Increase family & value weight from 12 to 13 and Sils Maria becomes the leading option.

12 → 13

SnowSils Maria

Increase snow weight from 24 to 25 and Sils Maria becomes the leading option.

24 → 25

Why Diavolezza leads Sils Maria · 0.1 pts

Access-3.5 pts

Snow+2.3 pts

Terrain+2.2 pts

Scale-0.9 pts

Lift system+0.3 pts

Family & value-0.3 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.

Diavolezza

#1 · Diavolezza · Switzerland

Decision65/100

Fit65/100

Now0/100

Quality8.5/10

Now00 cm freshReliability8686/100Terrain5656/100

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.

Fit64.5100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision64.5/100

Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow86/100 · 37% evidence 23.6 / 27.3 pts

Terrain78/100 · 52% evidence 19.5 / 25.0 pts

Scale77/100 · 100% evidence 13.9 / 18.2 pts

Lift system11/100 · 68% evidence 1.8 / 15.9 pts

Family & value42/100 · 41% evidence 5.7 / 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 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 · 72/100Snow reliabilityVery highSki area35 km · 913 m verticalCurrent 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; partial evidence..
Exceptional reliability match · 86/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence..

Consider

Lift-system evidence is less convincing.

Sils Maria

#2 · Corvatsch Furtschellas · Switzerland

Decision64/100

Fit64/100

Now0/100

Quality9.2/10

Now00 cm freshReliability8989/100Terrain6262/100Access30157 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.

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.

Snow89/100 · 37% evidence 21.3 / 24.0 pts

Terrain79/100 · 52% evidence 17.3 / 22.0 pts

Scale92/100 · 100% evidence 14.8 / 16.0 pts

Lift system11/100 · 68% evidence 1.5 / 14.0 pts

Access30/100 · 68% evidence 3.5 / 12.0 pts

Family & value50/100 · 41% evidence 6.0 / 12.0 pts

Data coverage: 59%

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 useSnow-first trips · 72/100Snow reliabilityVery highSki area120 km · 1,506 m verticalBest transfer157 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group50–149 km · Top 2,800+ m

Strengths

Solid terrain match · 62/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence..
Exceptional reliability match · 89/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence..

Consider

Lift-system evidence is less convincing.

Puoz Bass

#3 · · Switzerland

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	DiavolezzaDiavolezza	Sils MariaCorvatsch Furtschellas	Puoz BassSwitzerland
Assessment
Decision score	65/100	64/100	–
Structural Fit	65/100	64/100	–
Current opportunity	0/100	0/100	–
Overall quality	8.5/10	9.2/10clear advantage	–
Recommendation confidence	Low	Medium	Low
Ski-area profile
Historical snow reliability	74/100	77/100	–
Typical daytime high	-4°C	-5°C	–
Typical snow/freezing level	–	–	–
Typical overnight low	-10°C	-11°C	–
Rating	7.2/10	7.6/10clear advantage	–
Area size class	20–50 km	100–150 km	–
Ability profile	advanced	advanced	–
Price class	high	high	–
Terrain and altitude
Marked pistes	35 km	120 kmclear advantage	–
Lowest point	2,093 mclear advantage	1,797 m	–
Highest point	3,006 m	3,303 mclear advantage	–
Vertical range	913 m	1,506 mclear advantage	–
Blue pistes	0%	11%	–
Red pistes	77%	74%	–
Black pistes	23%clear advantage	15%	–
Terrain above 2,000 m	–	–	–
Terrain above 3,000 m	–	–	–
Piste-mix diversity	78/100clear advantage	68/100	–
Slope-angle diversity	–	–	–
Very/extremely steep terrain	–	–	–
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	0 cm
Open terrain and lifts
Open slopes	–	–	–
Open lifts	–	–	–
Lift capacity per piste km	126 pph/km	153 pph/km	–
Lift-system coverage	0.21×	0.15×	–
Terrain per lift	7.0 km/lift	8.6 km/lift	–
Weather
Minimum temperature	3°C	7°C	3°C
Maximum temperature	7°C	12°C	8°C
Suitability and facilities
Family suitability	–	–	–
Piste variety	–	–	–
Off-piste	–	–	–
Cross-country	crosscountry	crosscountry	–
Lift network	–	–	–
Mountain restaurants	–	–	–
Après-ski	–	–	–
Public transport	–	–	–
Best airport transfer	–	157 min	–
Skiing per transfer hour	–	46 km/h transfer	–

Shape the comparison

Start a comparison

Decision summary

Diavolezza

Diavolezza

Resort overview

Diavolezza

Sils Maria

Puoz Bass

Detailed comparison