Valberg
Effectively tied with Paesana. solid terrain match · 57/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale, mixed reliability match · 48/100 — led by strong snow resilience—but the result is close.
Strongest alternativePaesana
Main uncertaintyThe lead over Paesana is small. Most of the evidence requested by this priority profile is available.
What could change the resultReduce scale weight from 16 to 8 and Paesana becomes the leading option.
Difference between the first and second option.
The ranking changes little under nearby priority weights. Rank range 1–1.
Coverage and coherence of evidence used by this comparison.
Advanced analysisSensitivity, Pareto trade-offs and score contributions
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.
Reduce scale weight from 16 to 8 and Paesana becomes the leading option.
Increase terrain weight from 22 to 50 and Paesana becomes the leading option.
Increase access weight from 12 to 51 and Paesana becomes the leading option.
Increase lift system weight from 14 to 59 and Paesana becomes the leading option.
Why Valberg leads Paesana · 1.5 pts
Point contributions reconcile the structural Fit dimensions and confidence-limited current opportunity. Missing evidence is not treated as zero.