Compare ski resorts

Recommendation

Decision summary

Astun is the strongest match because of good terrain match · 66/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence, good reliability match · 73/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence. Formigal is the strongest alternative. 2 options remain on the Pareto frontier. 3 options have limited evidence coverage.

Recommended

Astun

68/100

Why

Astun is the strongest match because of good terrain match · 66/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence, good reliability match · 73/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence. Formigal is the strongest alternative. 2 options remain on the Pareto frontier. 3 options have limited evidence coverage.

Stale evidenceUpdated 1 d ago

Structural fit score: 68/100.

Supporting data are stale; treat the ranking as provisional.

AlternativeFormigal

Main uncertaintySome 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

Astun

Family progression baseLow-regret choice

Leads on good terrain match · 66/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence, good reliability match · 73/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence.

Why Astun leads Formigal Terrain fit +6.2 pts and Snow reliability +1.9 pts

Terrain fit +6.2Snow reliability +1.9Snow now -0.5

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

Strongest alternativeFormigal

Main uncertaintySome requested evidence is unavailable; the score is rescaled over the evidence that exists.

What could change the resultIf immediate snow and opening conditions dominate the decision, Formigal becomes the stronger option.

Lead margin7.7pts

Difference between the first and second option.

Ranking stabilityHigh100%

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

Evidence confidence57%

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 Astun leads Formigal · 7.7 pts

Lift system+5.1 pts

Snow+1.9 pts

Family & value+1.8 pts

Terrain-0.9 pts

Current opportunity-0.5 pts

Scale+0.2 pts

Point contributions reconcile the structural Fit dimensions and confidence-limited current opportunity. Missing evidence is not treated as zero.

Priority sensitivity · what can change the winner?

Immediate conditionsFormigal

If immediate snow and opening conditions dominate the decision, Formigal becomes the stronger option.

More comparison leadersAdditional category leaders

Resort overview

Trip match is profile-specific. Expand the calculation to see exactly how each score is built.

Astun

#1 · Astun · Spain

Decision68/100

Fit68/100

Now0/100

Quality5.8/10

Now00 cm freshReliability7373/100Terrain6666/100

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.

Fit67.7100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision67.7/100

Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow73/100 · 37% evidence 20.0 / 27.3 pts

Terrain61/100 · 52% evidence 15.3 / 25.0 pts

Scale73/100 · 100% evidence 13.2 / 18.2 pts

Lift system50/100 · 68% evidence 8.0 / 15.9 pts

Family & value82/100 · 41% evidence 11.2 / 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 typeFamily progression baseBest useFamily trips · 71/100Snow reliabilityVery highSki area40 km · 617 m verticalCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group<50 km · Top 2,000–2,799 m

Strengths

Good terrain match · 66/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence..
Good reliability match · 73/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence..

Consider

Some enriched evidence is unavailable; it is excluded from the score rather than treated as zero.

Formigal

#2 · Formigal · Spain

Decision60/100

Fit65/100

Now6/100

Quality7.5/10

Now628 cm upperReliability7272/100Terrain6262/100

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.

Fit64.792% weight Now6.18% weight Decision60.0/100

Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow72/100 · 37% evidence 19.7 / 27.3 pts

Terrain70/100 · 52% evidence 17.6 / 25.0 pts

Scale78/100 · 100% evidence 14.1 / 18.2 pts

Lift system20/100 · 68% evidence 3.1 / 15.9 pts

Family & value75/100 · 41% evidence 10.2 / 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.

Mountain snow28 cm 6.1 / 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 typeBalanced all-rounderBest useSnow-first trips · 67/100Snow reliabilityVery highSki area143 km · 764 m verticalCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group50–149 km · Top 2,000–2,799 m

Strengths

Solid terrain match · 62/100 — 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.

Candanchu

#3 · · Spain

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 6 days earlier

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	AstunAstun	FormigalFormigal	CandanchuSpain
Assessment
Decision score	68/100clear advantage	60/100	–
Structural Fit	68/100	65/100	–
Current opportunity	0/100	6/100clear advantage	–
Overall quality	5.8/10	7.5/10clear advantage	–
Recommendation confidence	Low	Low	Low
Ski-area profile
Historical snow reliability	72/100	72/100	–
Typical daytime high	4°C	2°Cclear advantage	–
Typical snow/freezing level	–	–	–
Typical overnight low	-3°C	-3°C	–
Rating	7.6/10	7.3/10	–
Area size class	20–50 km	100–150 km	–
Ability profile	advanced	advanced	–
Price class	avg	avg	–
Terrain and altitude
Marked pistes	40 km	143 kmclear advantage	–
Lowest point	1,655 mclear advantage	1,501 m	–
Highest point	2,272 m	2,265 m	–
Vertical range	617 m	764 m	–
Blue pistes	42%	34%	–
Red pistes	47%	52%	–
Black pistes	11%	14%	–
Terrain above 2,000 m	–	–	–
Terrain above 3,000 m	–	–	–
Piste-mix diversity	87/100	89/100	–
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	–	28 cm	–
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	531 pph/kmclear advantage	258 pph/km	–
Lift-system coverage	0.27×clear advantage	0.15×	–
Terrain per lift	3.3 km/lift	6.8 km/lift	–
Weather
Minimum temperature	0°C	-2°C	-2°C
Maximum temperature	5°C	3°C	5°C
Suitability and facilities
Family suitability	–	family	–
Piste variety	–	slopes	–
Off-piste	offpiste	–	–
Cross-country	–	–	–
Lift network	–	lifts	–
Mountain restaurants	–	–	–
Après-ski	–	–	–
Public transport	–	–	–
Best airport transfer	–	–	–
Skiing per transfer hour	–	–	–

Shape the comparison

Start a comparison

Decision summary

Astun

Astun

Resort overview

Astun

Formigal

Candanchu

Detailed comparison