Compare ski resorts

Recommendation

Decision summary

Roccaraso is the strongest match because of good terrain match · 70/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence, good reliability match · 65/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence. Campo Felice is the strongest alternative. 2 options remain on the Pareto frontier. 2 options have limited evidence coverage.

Narrow lead

Roccaraso

69/100

Why

Roccaraso is the strongest match because of good terrain match · 70/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence, good reliability match · 65/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence. Campo Felice is the strongest alternative. 2 options remain on the Pareto frontier. 2 options have limited evidence coverage.

Stale evidenceUpdated 1 d ago

Structural fit score: 69/100.

Supporting data are stale; treat the ranking as provisional.

AlternativeCampo Felice

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

Roccaraso

Family progression baseLow-regret choiceNarrow lead

Leads on good terrain match · 70/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence, good reliability match · 65/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence.

Why Roccaraso leads Campo Felice Snow reliability +4.3 pts and Terrain fit +1.9 pts

Snow reliability +4.3Terrain fit +1.9

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

Strongest alternativeCampo Felice

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

What could change the resultIncrease lift system weight from 14 to 46 and Campo Felice becomes the leading option.

Lead margin6.3pts

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

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.

Lift systemCampo Felice

Increase lift system weight from 14 to 46 and Campo Felice becomes the leading option.

14 → 46

Why Roccaraso leads Campo Felice · 6.3 pts

Snow+4.3 pts

Lift system-2.8 pts

Scale+1.8 pts

Family & value+1.6 pts

Terrain+1.3 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.

Roccaraso

#1 · Roccaraso Rivisondoli · Italy

Decision69/100

Fit69/100

Now0/100

Quality6.0/10

Now00 cm freshReliability6565/100Terrain7070/100

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.

Fit68.6100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision68.6/100

Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow65/100 · 37% evidence 17.7 / 27.3 pts

Terrain75/100 · 52% evidence 18.6 / 25.0 pts

Scale76/100 · 100% evidence 13.9 / 18.2 pts

Lift system45/100 · 68% evidence 7.2 / 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 useAdvanced skiing · 70/100Snow reliabilityHighSki area91 km · 832 m verticalCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group50–149 km · Top 2,000–2,799 m

Strengths

Good terrain match · 70/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence..
Good reliability match · 65/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence..

Consider

Lift-system evidence is less convincing.

Campo Felice

#2 · Rocca di Cambio Campo Felice · Italy

Decision62/100

Fit62/100

Now0/100

Quality4.0/10

Now00 cm freshReliability4949/100Terrain6767/100

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.

Fit62.3100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision62.3/100

Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow49/100 · 37% evidence 13.4 / 27.3 pts

Terrain69/100 · 52% evidence 17.3 / 25.0 pts

Scale67/100 · 100% evidence 12.1 / 18.2 pts

Lift system63/100 · 68% evidence 10.0 / 15.9 pts

Family & value71/100 · 41% evidence 9.6 / 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 typeBalanced all-rounderBest useAdvanced skiing · 64/100Snow reliabilityLowSki area31 km · 505 m verticalCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group<50 km · Top <2,000 m

Strengths

Good terrain match · 67/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence..
Mixed reliability match · 49/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence..

Consider

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

Cerreto Laghi

#3 · Cerreto Laghi · Italy

Decision41/100

Fit41/100

Now0/100

Quality–/10

Now00 cm freshReliability4040/100Terrain4848/100Access12166 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.

Fit41.4100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision41.4/100

Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow40/100 · 37% evidence 9.7 / 24.0 pts

Terrain69/100 · 44% evidence 15.3 / 22.0 pts

Scale39/100 · 100% evidence 6.3 / 16.0 pts

Lift system29/100 · 68% evidence 4.0 / 14.0 pts

Access12/100 · 68% evidence 1.4 / 12.0 pts

Family & value40/100 · 41% evidence 4.8 / 12.0 pts

Data coverage: 57%

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 typeTerrain-led destinationBest useAdvanced skiing · 50/100Snow reliabilityLowSki area9 km · 481 m verticalBest transfer166 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group<50 km · Top <2,000 m

Strengths

Mixed terrain match · 48/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence..
Mixed reliability match · 40/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence..

Consider

Snow resilience is less distinctive.

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	RoccarasoRoccaraso Rivisondoli	Campo FeliceRocca di Cambio Campo Felice	Cerreto LaghiCerreto Laghi
Assessment
Decision score	69/100clear advantage	62/100	41/100
Structural Fit	69/100clear advantage	62/100	41/100
Current opportunity	0/100	0/100	0/100
Overall quality	6.0/10clear advantage	4.0/10	–
Recommendation confidence	Low	Low	Medium
Ski-area profile
Historical snow reliability	63/100clear advantage	35/100	19/100
Typical daytime high	6°C	8°C	5°C
Typical snow/freezing level	–	–	–
Typical overnight low	-1°C	1°C	-1°C
Rating	7.0/10	7.0/10	6.5/10
Area size class	50–100 km	20–50 km	20 km or less
Ability profile	intermediate	expert	expert
Price class	avg	avg	avg
Terrain and altitude
Marked pistes	91 kmclear advantage	31 km	9 km
Lowest point	1,309 m	1,411 m	1,350 m
Highest point	2,141 mclear advantage	1,916 m	1,831 m
Vertical range	832 mclear advantage	505 m	481 m
Blue pistes	41%	28%	2%
Red pistes	36%	44%	54%
Black pistes	23%	28%	43%clear advantage
Terrain above 2,000 m	–	–	–
Terrain above 3,000 m	–	–	–
Piste-mix diversity	98/100	98/100	71/100
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	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	425 pph/km	729 pph/kmclear advantage	456 pph/km
Lift-system coverage	0.23×	0.28×	0.18×
Terrain per lift	3.9 km/lift	2.1 km/lift	4.6 km/lift
Weather
Minimum temperature	4°C	1°C	4°C
Maximum temperature	11°C	6°C	8°C
Suitability and facilities
Family suitability	family	–	–
Piste variety	–	–	–
Off-piste	–	–	–
Cross-country	–	–	–
Lift network	–	–	–
Mountain restaurants	–	–	–
Après-ski	–	–	–
Public transport	–	–	–
Best airport transfer	–	–	166 min
Skiing per transfer hour	–	–	3 km/h transfer

Shape the comparison

Start a comparison

Decision summary

Roccaraso

Roccaraso

Resort overview

Roccaraso

Campo Felice

Cerreto Laghi

Detailed comparison