Compare ski resorts

Recommendation

Decision summary

Lenggries narrowly leads because of good terrain match · 65/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale, mixed reliability match · 41/100 — led by strong snow resilience. Aschau im Chiemgau is the strongest alternative. 2 options remain on the Pareto frontier.

Effectively tied

Lenggries

62/100

Why

Lenggries narrowly leads because of good terrain match · 65/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale, mixed reliability match · 41/100 — led by strong snow resilience. Aschau im Chiemgau is the strongest alternative. 2 options remain on the Pareto frontier.

Limited evidenceUpdated 20 h ago

Structural fit score: 62/100.

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

AlternativeAschau im Chiemgau

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

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

Lenggries

Efficient short-break baseLow-regret choiceEffectively tied

Effectively tied with Aschau im Chiemgau. good terrain match · 65/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale, mixed reliability match · 41/100 — led by strong snow resilience—but the result is close.

Why Lenggries leads Aschau im Chiemgau Terrain fit +1.3 pts and Snow reliability +0.3 pts

Terrain fit +1.3Access -0.7Snow reliability +0.3

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

Strongest alternativeAschau im Chiemgau

Main uncertaintyThe lead over Aschau im Chiemgau 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 Aschau im Chiemgau becomes the leading option.

Lead margin0.9pts

Difference between the first and second option.

Ranking stabilityHigh100%

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

Evidence confidence77%

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 systemAschau im Chiemgau

Reduce lift system weight from 14 to 11 and Aschau im Chiemgau becomes the leading option.

14 → 11

Family & valueAschau im Chiemgau

Increase family & value weight from 12 to 16 and Aschau im Chiemgau becomes the leading option.

12 → 16

ScaleAschau im Chiemgau

Increase scale weight from 16 to 24 and Aschau im Chiemgau becomes the leading option.

16 → 24

TerrainAschau im Chiemgau

Reduce terrain weight from 22 to 11 and Aschau im Chiemgau becomes the leading option.

22 → 11

Why Lenggries leads Aschau im Chiemgau · 0.9 pts

Lift system+4.3 pts

Family & value-2.9 pts

Scale-2.1 pts

Terrain+2.0 pts

Access-0.7 pts

Snow+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.

Lenggries

#1 · Lenggries · Germany

Decision62/100

Fit62/100

Now0/100

Quality4.0/10

Now00 cm freshReliability4141/100Terrain6565/100Access8657 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.

Fit61.6100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision61.6/100

Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow41/100 · 73% evidence 9.7 / 24.0 pts

Terrain69/100 · 80% evidence 15.2 / 22.0 pts

Scale68/100 · 100% evidence 10.8 / 16.0 pts

Lift system67/100 · 68% evidence 9.4 / 14.0 pts

Access86/100 · 68% evidence 10.3 / 12.0 pts

Family & value52/100 · 41% evidence 6.2 / 12.0 pts

Data coverage: 74%

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 typeEfficient short-break baseBest useShort breaks · 65/100Snow reliabilityMarginalSki area31 km · 1,012 m verticalTerrain >2,000 m0%Best transfer57 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group<50 km · Top <2,000 m

Strengths

Good terrain match · 65/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale..
Mixed reliability match · 41/100 — led by strong snow resilience..

Consider

Snow resilience is less distinctive.

Aschau im Chiemgau

#2 · Region Chiemgau · Germany

Decision61/100

Fit61/100

Now0/100

Quality4.0/10

Now00 cm freshReliability3939/100Terrain6363/100Access9247 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.

Fit60.7100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision60.7/100

Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow39/100 · 73% evidence 9.4 / 24.0 pts

Terrain60/100 · 80% evidence 13.2 / 22.0 pts

Scale81/100 · 85% evidence 12.9 / 16.0 pts

Lift system37/100 · 8% evidence 5.1 / 14.0 pts

Access92/100 · 68% evidence 11.0 / 12.0 pts

Family & value76/100 · 41% evidence 9.1 / 12.0 pts

Data coverage: 63%

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 typeAccess-led destinationBest useFamily trips · 64/100Snow reliabilityMarginalSki area51 km · 990 m verticalTerrain >2,000 m0%Best transfer47 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group50–149 km · Top <2,000 m

Strengths

Solid terrain match · 63/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence..
Mixed reliability match · 39/100 — led by strong snow resilience..

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	LenggriesLenggries	Aschau im ChiemgauRegion Chiemgau
Assessment
Decision score	62/100	61/100
Structural Fit	62/100	61/100
Current opportunity	0/100	0/100
Overall quality	4.0/10	4.0/10
Recommendation confidence	Medium	Medium
Ski-area profile
Historical snow reliability	49/100	50/100
Typical daytime high	5°C	5°C
Typical snow/freezing level	–	–
Typical overnight low	-2°C	-3°C
Rating	7.2/10clear advantage	6.0/10
Area size class	20–50 km	50–100 km
Ability profile	advanced	advanced
Price class	avg	avg
Terrain and altitude
Marked pistes	31 km	51 kmclear advantage
Lowest point	700 m	610 m
Highest point	1,712 m	1,600 m
Vertical range	1,012 m	990 m
Blue pistes	11%	40%
Red pistes	67%	47%
Black pistes	21%clear advantage	13%
Terrain above 2,000 m	0%	0%
Terrain above 3,000 m	0%	0%
Piste-mix diversity	77/100	90/100clear advantage
Slope-angle diversity	51/100clear advantage	34/100
Very/extremely steep terrain	5%	1%
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
Open terrain and lifts
Open slopes	–	–
Open lifts	–	–
Lift capacity per piste km	640 pph/km	–
Lift-system coverage	0.40×	–
Terrain per lift	2.0 km/lift	7.3 km/lift
Weather
Minimum temperature	13°C	14°C
Maximum temperature	21°C	21°C
Suitability and facilities
Family suitability	family	–
Piste variety	–	–
Off-piste	–	–
Cross-country	–	–
Lift network	–	–
Mountain restaurants	–	–
Après-ski	–	–
Public transport	transit	transit
Best airport transfer	57 min	47 min
Skiing per transfer hour	32 km/h transfer	65 km/h transferclear advantage

Shape the comparison

Start a comparison

Decision summary

Lenggries

Lenggries

Resort overview

Lenggries

Aschau im Chiemgau

Detailed comparison