Compare ski resorts

Recommendation

Decision summary

Avoriaz narrowly leads because of strong terrain match · 85/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence, solid reliability match · 58/100 — led by strong snow resilience. Megeve is the strongest alternative. 2 options remain on the Pareto frontier. 1 option have limited evidence coverage.

Effectively tied

Avoriaz

73/100

Why

Avoriaz narrowly leads because of strong terrain match · 85/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence, solid reliability match · 58/100 — led by strong snow resilience. Megeve is the strongest alternative. 2 options remain on the Pareto frontier. 1 option have limited evidence coverage.

Mixed evidenceUpdated 16 h ago

Strong structural fit for the selected priorities (76/100).
Solid upper-mountain snow base at 308 cm.

AlternativeMegeve

Main uncertaintyThe lead over Megeve is small. Most of the evidence requested by this priority profile is available.

Would change ifA material forecast shift or a different priority profile could change the ranking.

Detailed comparison reasoningEvidence bridge, trade-offs and decision boundaries

Recommended for this profile

Avoriaz

Large-domain explorerLow-regret choiceEffectively tied

Effectively tied with Megeve. strong terrain match · 85/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence, solid reliability match · 58/100 — led by strong snow resilience—but the result is close.

Why Avoriaz leads Megeve Snow now +7.3 pts

Snow now +7.3Access -3.2Snow reliability -2.5Terrain fit -0.5

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

Strongest alternativeMegeve

Main uncertaintyThe lead over Megeve is small. Most of the evidence requested by this priority profile is available.

What could change the resultReduce lift system weight from 14 to 11 and Megeve becomes the leading option.

Lead margin1.0pts

Difference between the first and second option.

Ranking stabilityHigh100%

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

Evidence confidence68%

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.

Lift systemMegeve

Reduce lift system weight from 14 to 11 and Megeve becomes the leading option.

14 → 11

AccessMegeve

Increase access weight from 12 to 18 and Megeve becomes the leading option.

12 → 18

ScaleMegeve

Increase scale weight from 16 to 23 and Megeve becomes the leading option.

16 → 23

TerrainMegeve

Increase terrain weight from 22 to 53 and Megeve becomes the leading option.

22 → 53

Why Avoriaz leads Megeve · 1.0 pts

Current opportunity+7.3 pts

Lift system+5.5 pts

Scale-3.6 pts

Access-3.2 pts

Snow-2.5 pts

Terrain-2.4 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.

Avoriaz

#1 · Portes du Soleil · France

Decision73/100

Fit76/100

Now53/100

Quality6.3/10

Now53308 cm upperReliability5858/100Terrain8585/100Access6997 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.

Fit76.386% weight Now53.114% weight Decision73.1/100

Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow58/100 · 73% evidence 13.9 / 24.0 pts

Terrain72/100 · 80% evidence 15.9 / 22.0 pts

Scale88/100 · 100% evidence 14.0 / 16.0 pts

Lift system98/100 · 8% evidence 13.7 / 14.0 pts

Access69/100 · 68% evidence 8.2 / 12.0 pts

Family & value88/100 · 41% evidence 10.6 / 12.0 pts

Data coverage: 65%

Current-opportunity calculation

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

Mountain snow308 cm 42.9 / 42.9 pts

Fresh snow0 cm 0.0 / 22.9 pts

Valley snow10 cm 1.3 / 22.9 pts

Mid-mountain snow189 cm 9.0 / 11.4 pts

Open terrainNo data excluded

Snow qualityNo data excluded

Data coverage: 70%

Destination typeLarge-domain explorerBest useFamily trips · 79/100Snow reliabilityVery highSki area580 km · 1,269 m verticalTerrain >2,000 m8%Best transfer97 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group300+ km · Top 2,000–2,799 m

Strengths

Strong terrain match · 85/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence..
Solid reliability match · 58/100 — led by strong snow resilience..

Megeve

#2 · Evasion Mont Blanc · France

Decision72/100

Fit72/100

Now0/100

Quality6.1/10

Now00 cm freshReliability6161/100Terrain7474/100Access8664 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.

Fit72.1100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision72.1/100

Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow61/100 · 73% evidence 14.5 / 24.0 pts

Terrain73/100 · 80% evidence 16.1 / 22.0 pts

Scale98/100 · 85% evidence 15.7 / 16.0 pts

Lift system45/100 · 68% evidence 6.3 / 14.0 pts

Access86/100 · 68% evidence 10.3 / 12.0 pts

Family & value77/100 · 41% evidence 9.2 / 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 · 73/100Snow reliabilityHighSki area401 km · 1,587 m verticalTerrain >2,000 m16%Best transfer64 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group300+ km · Top 2,000–2,799 m

Strengths

Good terrain match · 74/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale..
Solid reliability match · 61/100 — led by strong snow resilience..

Consider

Lift-system evidence is less convincing.

Mont Blanc

#3 · · France

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	AvoriazPortes du Soleil	MegeveEvasion Mont Blanc	Mont BlancFrance
Assessment
Decision score	73/100	72/100	–
Structural Fit	76/100clear advantage	72/100	–
Current opportunity	53/100clear advantage	0/100	–
Overall quality	6.3/10	6.1/10	–
Recommendation confidence	Medium	Medium	Low
Ski-area profile
Historical snow reliability	71/100	68/100	–
Typical daytime high	3°C	4°C	–
Typical snow/freezing level	–	–	–
Typical overnight low	-3°C	-3°C	–
Rating	7.4/10	7.5/10	–
Area size class	250+ km	250+ km	–
Ability profile	intermediate	advanced	–
Price class	high	high	–
Terrain and altitude
Marked pistes	580 kmclear advantage	401 km	–
Lowest point	985 m	850 m	–
Highest point	2,254 m	2,437 mclear advantage	–
Vertical range	1,269 m	1,587 mclear advantage	–
Blue pistes	53%	35%	–
Red pistes	36%	52%	–
Black pistes	10%	13%	–
Terrain above 2,000 m	8%	16%	–
Terrain above 3,000 m	0%	0%	–
Piste-mix diversity	85/100	89/100	–
Slope-angle diversity	58/100clear advantage	48/100	–
Very/extremely steep terrain	6%	5%	–
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	10 cm	–	–
Mid-mountain snow	189 cm	–	–
Mountain snow	308 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	–	377 pph/km	–
Lift-system coverage	–	0.25×	–
Terrain per lift	3.5 km/lift	3.7 km/lift	–
Weather
Minimum temperature	8°C	7°C	-14°C
Maximum temperature	13°C	17°C	-3°C
Suitability and facilities
Family suitability	family	family	–
Piste variety	–	slopes	–
Off-piste	–	–	–
Cross-country	–	–	–
Lift network	–	–	–
Mountain restaurants	–	–	–
Après-ski	–	–	–
Public transport	transit	transit	–
Best airport transfer	97 min	64 minclear advantage	–
Skiing per transfer hour	359 km/h transfer	376 km/h transfer	–

Shape the comparison

Start a comparison

Decision summary

Avoriaz

Avoriaz

Resort overview

Avoriaz

Megeve

Mont Blanc

Detailed comparison