Where to ski

Compare ski resorts

Compare long-term ski-area quality, current conditions and short-term seven-day skiing scenarios without mixing their evidence.

Selected10 of 10

ProfileBalanced

ModeStructural

Decision horizon

Recommendation

Decision summary

Chamonix is the strongest match because of strong terrain match · 86/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale, good reliability match · 71/100 — led by strong snow resilience. Arinsal is the strongest alternative. 7 options remain on the Pareto frontier. 3 options have limited evidence coverage.

Narrow lead

Chamonix

82/100

Why

Chamonix is the strongest match because of strong terrain match · 86/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale, good reliability match · 71/100 — led by strong snow resilience. Arinsal is the strongest alternative. 7 options remain on the Pareto frontier. 3 options have limited evidence coverage.

Limited evidenceUpdated 10 min ago

Strong overall decision score (82/100).

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

AlternativeArinsal

Main uncertaintyMost of the evidence requested by this priority profile is available.

Would change ifFresh observations or stronger source agreement could materially change the ranking.

Open webcams Show on map Inspect forecast

Detailed comparison reasoningEvidence bridge, trade-offs and decision boundaries

Recommended for this profile

Chamonix

Advanced-terrain specialistLow-regret choiceNarrow lead

Leads on strong terrain match · 86/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale, good reliability match · 71/100 — led by strong snow resilience.

Why Chamonix leads Arinsal Access +10.2 pts

Access +10.2Snow reliability -3.6Terrain fit -1.2

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

Strongest alternativeArinsal

Main uncertaintyMost of the evidence requested by this priority profile is available.

What could change the resultIncrease snow weight from 24 to 53 and Breuil Cervinia becomes the leading option.

Lead margin5.4pts

Difference between the first and second option.

Ranking stabilityHigh100%

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

Evidence confidence75%

Coverage and coherence of evidence used by this comparison.

Advanced analysisSensitivity, Pareto trade-offs and score contributions

Pareto frontier7 options

3 options are 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.

SnowBreuil Cervinia

Increase snow weight from 24 to 53 and Breuil Cervinia becomes the leading option.

24 → 53

Family & valueArinsal

Increase family & value weight from 12 to 57 and Arinsal becomes the leading option.

12 → 57

Why Chamonix leads Arinsal · 5.4 pts

Access+10.2 pts

Snow-3.6 pts

Family & value-2.8 pts

Lift system-1.9 pts

Scale+1.8 pts

Terrain+1.7 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.

Chamonix

#1 · Chamonix Valley · France

Decision82/100

Fit82/100

Now–/100

Quality6.0/10

Reliability7171/100Terrain8686/100Access8563 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.

Fit81.9100% weight Now–0% weight Decision81.9/100

Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow71/100 · 73% evidence 16.9 / 24.0 pts

Terrain86/100 · 80% evidence 19.0 / 22.0 pts

Scale98/100 · 85% evidence 15.7 / 16.0 pts

Lift system76/100 · 68% evidence 10.7 / 14.0 pts

Access85/100 · 68% evidence 10.2 / 12.0 pts

Family & value79/100 · 41% evidence 9.5 / 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 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 typeAdvanced-terrain specialistBest useAdvanced skiing · 84/100Snow reliabilityHighSki area175 km · 2,842 m verticalTerrain >2,000 m55%Best transfer63 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group150–299 km · Top 2,800+ m

Strengths

Strong terrain match · 86/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale..
Good reliability match · 71/100 — led by strong snow resilience..

Arinsal

#2 · Pal Arinsal · Andorra

Decision77/100

Fit77/100

Now–/100

Quality6.1/10

Reliability7575/100Terrain7777/100

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.

Fit76.5100% weight Now–0% weight Decision76.5/100

Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow75/100 · 37% evidence 20.5 / 27.3 pts

Terrain69/100 · 52% evidence 17.3 / 25.0 pts

Scale76/100 · 100% evidence 13.9 / 18.2 pts

Lift system79/100 · 68% evidence 12.6 / 15.9 pts

Family & value90/100 · 41% evidence 12.3 / 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 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 typeFamily progression baseBest useFamily trips · 81/100Snow reliabilityHighSki area63 km · 987 m verticalCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group50–149 km · Top 2,000–2,799 m

Strengths

Strong terrain match · 77/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence..
Good reliability match · 75/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence..

Consider

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

Breuil Cervinia

#3 · Matterhorn Ski Paradise · Italy

Decision75/100

Fit75/100

Now–/100

Quality9.2/10

Reliability9494/100Terrain7171/100Access61104 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.

Fit75.4100% weight Now–0% weight Decision75.4/100

Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow94/100 · 73% evidence 22.5 / 24.0 pts

Terrain75/100 · 80% evidence 16.4 / 22.0 pts

Scale99/100 · 100% evidence 15.9 / 16.0 pts

Lift system40/100 · 68% evidence 5.6 / 14.0 pts

Access61/100 · 68% evidence 7.3 / 12.0 pts

Family & value64/100 · 41% evidence 7.7 / 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 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 typeHigh-alpine snow anchorBest useSnow-first trips · 81/100Snow reliabilityVery highSki area322 km · 2,337 m verticalTerrain >2,000 m92%Best transfer104 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group300+ km · Top 2,800+ m

Strengths

Good terrain match · 71/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale..
Exceptional reliability match · 94/100 — led by strong snow resilience..

Consider

Lift-system evidence is less convincing.

ValFrejus

#4 · Val Frejus · France

Decision71/100

Fit71/100

Now–/100

Quality9.5/10

Reliability9090/100Terrain6565/100Access6590 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.

Fit71.2100% weight Now–0% weight Decision71.2/100

Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow90/100 · 73% evidence 21.6 / 24.0 pts

Terrain77/100 · 80% evidence 17.0 / 22.0 pts

Scale80/100 · 100% evidence 12.8 / 16.0 pts

Lift system11/100 · 68% evidence 1.5 / 14.0 pts

Access65/100 · 68% evidence 7.8 / 12.0 pts

Family & value88/100 · 41% evidence 10.5 / 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 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 typeFamily progression baseBest useSnow-first trips · 77/100Snow reliabilityExceptionalSki area70 km · 1,187 m verticalTerrain >2,000 m87%Best transfer90 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group50–149 km · Top 2,000–2,799 m

Strengths

Good terrain match · 65/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale..
Exceptional reliability match · 90/100 — led by strong snow resilience..

Consider

Lift-system evidence is less convincing.

Saas

#5 · Saastal · Switzerland

Decision64/100

Fit64/100

Now–/100

Quality8.7/10

Reliability7474/100Terrain7070/100Access10441 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.

Fit63.7100% weight Now–0% weight Decision63.7/100

Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow74/100 · 73% evidence 17.7 / 24.0 pts

Terrain74/100 · 80% evidence 16.3 / 22.0 pts

Scale97/100 · 85% evidence 15.5 / 16.0 pts

Lift system39/100 · 68% evidence 5.4 / 14.0 pts

Access10/100 · 68% evidence 1.2 / 12.0 pts

Family & value63/100 · 41% evidence 7.6 / 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 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 typeLarge-domain explorerBest useAdvanced skiing · 70/100Snow reliabilityVery highSki area142 km · 2,101 m verticalTerrain >2,000 m57%Best transfer441 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group50–149 km · Top 2,800+ m

Strengths

Good terrain match · 70/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale..
Good reliability match · 74/100 — led by strong snow resilience..

Consider

Access is a relative compromise.

Limone Piemonte

#6 · Limone Piemonte · Italy

Decision63/100

Fit63/100

Now–/100

Quality6.8/10

Reliability4949/100Terrain7070/100Access55100 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.

Fit63.2100% weight Now–0% weight Decision63.2/100

Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow49/100 · 73% evidence 11.9 / 24.0 pts

Terrain78/100 · 80% evidence 17.1 / 22.0 pts

Scale81/100 · 85% evidence 13.0 / 16.0 pts

Lift system57/100 · 68% evidence 7.9 / 14.0 pts

Access55/100 · 68% evidence 6.6 / 12.0 pts

Family & value56/100 · 41% evidence 6.7 / 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 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 typeLarge-domain explorerBest useAdvanced skiing · 68/100Snow reliabilityLowSki area52 km · 1,014 m verticalTerrain >2,000 m7%Best transfer100 minCurrent 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..
Mixed reliability match · 49/100 — led by strong snow resilience..

Consider

Snow trails the selected-set median by 28 points.

Nax

#7 · Nax · Switzerland

Decision63/100

Fit63/100

Now–/100

Quality7.2/10

Reliability7979/100Terrain5959/100Access52114 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.

Fit63.1100% weight Now–0% weight Decision63.1/100

Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow79/100 · 37% evidence 19.0 / 24.0 pts

Terrain71/100 · 52% evidence 15.6 / 22.0 pts

Scale71/100 · 100% evidence 11.4 / 16.0 pts

Lift system8/100 · 68% evidence 1.2 / 14.0 pts

Access52/100 · 68% evidence 6.2 / 12.0 pts

Family & value81/100 · 41% evidence 9.8 / 12.0 pts

Data coverage: 59%

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 typeFamily progression baseBest useSnow-first trips · 68/100Snow reliabilityHighSki area35 km · 1,145 m verticalBest transfer114 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group<50 km · Top 2,000–2,799 m

Strengths

Solid terrain match · 59/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence..
Strong reliability match · 79/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence..

Consider

Lift-system evidence is less convincing.

Zuoz

#8 · Zuoz · Switzerland

Decision62/100

Fit62/100

Now–/100

Quality8.5/10

Reliability8080/100Terrain6161/100Access28141 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.

Fit61.8100% weight Now–0% weight Decision61.8/100

Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow80/100 · 37% evidence 19.3 / 24.0 pts

Terrain69/100 · 52% evidence 15.2 / 22.0 pts

Scale57/100 · 100% evidence 9.1 / 16.0 pts

Lift system33/100 · 68% evidence 4.6 / 14.0 pts

Access28/100 · 68% evidence 3.3 / 12.0 pts

Family & value85/100 · 41% evidence 10.2 / 12.0 pts

Data coverage: 59%

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 typeFamily progression baseBest useSnow-first trips · 68/100Snow reliabilityVery highSki area15 km · 745 m verticalBest transfer141 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group<50 km · Top 2,000–2,799 m

Strengths

Solid terrain match · 61/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence..
Strong reliability match · 80/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence..

Consider

Lift-system evidence is less convincing.

Ceillac en Queyras

#9 · Ceillac en Queyras · France

Decision62/100

Fit62/100

Now–/100

Quality–/10

Reliability8282/100Terrain5454/100

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.

Fit61.5100% weight Now–0% weight Decision61.5/100

Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow82/100 · 37% evidence 22.4 / 27.3 pts

Terrain59/100 · 44% evidence 14.8 / 25.0 pts

Scale61/100 · 100% evidence 11.1 / 18.2 pts

Lift system15/100 · 68% evidence 2.4 / 15.9 pts

Family & value79/100 · 41% evidence 10.8 / 13.6 pts

AccessNo data excluded

Data coverage: 49%

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 typeFamily progression baseBest useSnow-first trips · 68/100Snow reliabilityExceptionalSki area25 km · 850 m verticalCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group<50 km · Top 2,000–2,799 m

Strengths

Solid terrain match · 54/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence..
Strong reliability match · 82/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence..

Consider

Lift-system evidence is less convincing.

Bergun

#10 · Bergun Bravuogn · Switzerland

Decision43/100

Fit43/100

Now–/100

Quality6.5/10

Reliability4848/100Terrain4545/100Access26133 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.

Fit43.3100% weight Now–0% weight Decision43.3/100

Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow48/100 · 37% evidence 11.5 / 24.0 pts

Terrain20/100 · 39% evidence 4.3 / 22.0 pts

Scale20/100 · 100% evidence 3.1 / 16.0 pts

Lift system81/100 · 68% evidence 11.4 / 14.0 pts

Access26/100 · 68% evidence 3.1 / 12.0 pts

Family & value82/100 · 31% evidence 9.9 / 12.0 pts

Data coverage: 55%

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 typeFamily progression baseBest useFamily trips · 54/100Snow reliabilityModerateSki area2 km · 169 m verticalBest transfer133 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group<50 km · Top <2,000 m

Strengths

Mixed terrain match · 45/100 — led by strong lift-system evidence and strong terrain profile; partial evidence..
Mixed reliability match · 48/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence..

Consider

Terrain depth 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	ChamonixChamonix Valley	ArinsalPal Arinsal	Breuil CerviniaMatterhorn Ski Paradise	ValFrejusVal Frejus	SaasSaastal	Limone PiemonteLimone Piemonte	NaxNax	ZuozZuoz	Ceillac en QueyrasCeillac en Queyras	BergunBergun Bravuogn
Assessment
Decision score	82/100clear advantage	77/100	75/100	71/100	64/100	63/100	63/100	62/100	62/100	43/100
Structural Fit	82/100clear advantage	77/100	75/100	71/100	64/100	63/100	63/100	62/100	62/100	43/100
Current opportunity	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
Overall quality	6.0/10	6.1/10	9.2/10	9.5/10clear advantage	8.7/10	6.8/10	7.2/10	8.5/10	–	6.5/10
Recommendation confidence	Medium	Low	Medium	Medium	Medium	Medium	Medium	Medium	Low	Low
Ski-area profile
Historical snow reliability	68/100	63/100	76/100	85/100	78/100	36/100	70/100	79/100	83/100	59/100
Typical daytime high	3°C	5°C	-2°C	-1°C	1°C	6°C	3°C	0°C	0°C	0°C
Typical snow/freezing level	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
Typical overnight low	-4°C	-3°C	-7°C	-7°C	-6°C	-1°C	-6°C	-10°Cclear advantage	-7°C	-7°C
Rating	8.1/10	7.9/10	8.1/10	7.1/10	7.4/10	7.1/10	6.2/10	6.4/10	5.8/10	5.8/10
Area size class	150–250 km	50–100 km	250+ km	50–100 km	100–150 km	50–100 km	20–50 km	20 km or less	20–50 km	20 km or less
Ability profile	advanced	intermediate	advanced	intermediate	advanced	expert	advanced	intermediate	advanced	novice
Price class	high	avg	high	low	high	low	high	high	–	high
Terrain and altitude
Marked pistes	175 km	63 km	322 kmclear advantage	70 km	142 km	52 km	35 km	15 km	25 km	2 km
Lowest point	1,000 m	1,550 m	1,562 m	1,550 m	1,472 m	1,046 m	1,495 m	1,720 m	1,650 m	1,371 m
Highest point	3,842 m	2,537 m	3,899 m	2,737 m	3,573 m	2,060 m	2,640 m	2,465 m	2,500 m	1,540 m
Vertical range	2,842 mclear advantage	987 m	2,337 m	1,187 m	2,101 m	1,014 m	1,145 m	745 m	850 m	169 m
Blue pistes	34%	49%	23%	57%	22%	13%	43%	60%	48%	100%
Red pistes	44%	38%	68%	29%	62%	54%	57%	20%	48%	0%
Black pistes	22%	13%	8%	14%	16%	33%clear advantage	0%	20%	4%	0%
Terrain above 2,000 m	55%	–	92%	87%	57%	7%	–	–	–	–
Terrain above 3,000 m	0%	–	21%clear advantage	1%	0%	0%	–	–	–	–
Piste-mix diversity	97/100	89/100	74/100	87/100	84/100	88/100	99/100	86/100	76/100	–
Slope-angle diversity	86/100clear advantage	–	51/100	68/100	68/100	53/100	–	–	–	–
Very/extremely steep terrain	21%clear advantage	–	6%	9%	2%	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	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
Mid-mountain snow	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
Mountain snow	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
Fresh snow	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
Snow quality	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
Snow alert	0 cm	0 cm	0 cm	0 cm	0 cm	0 cm	0 cm	0 cm	0 cm	0 cm
Open terrain and lifts
Open slopes	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
Open lifts	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
Lift capacity per piste km	556 pph/km	798 pph/km	298 pph/km	213 pph/km	289 pph/km	461 pph/km	139 pph/km	287 pph/km	206 pph/km	1,300 pph/kmclear advantage
Lift-system coverage	0.48×	0.33×	0.28×	0.10×	0.28×	0.32×	0.14×	0.35×	0.21×	0.65×clear advantage
Terrain per lift	2.5 km/lift	2.0 km/lift	6.3 km/lift	7.8 km/lift	3.6 km/lift	3.3 km/lift	5.8 km/lift	3.0 km/lift	4.2 km/lift	0.7 km/lift
Weather
Minimum temperature	3°C	5°C	0°C	2°C	1°C	5°C	-1°C	-1°C	2°C	1°C
Maximum temperature	10°C	10°C	6°C	9°C	7°C	9°C	4°C	9°C	8°C	9°C
Suitability and facilities
Family suitability	–	family	–	family	family	family	–	–	–	family
Piste variety	slopes	–	slopes	–	slopes	–	–	–	–	–
Off-piste	offpiste	–	offpiste	–	–	offpiste	–	–	–	–
Cross-country	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	crosscountry	–	–
Lift network	–	lifts	lifts	–	lifts	–	–	–	–	–
Mountain restaurants	–	–	restaurants	–	restaurants	–	–	–	–	–
Après-ski	–	–	apresski	–	apresski	–	–	–	–	–
Public transport	transit	–	transit	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
Best airport transfer	63 minclear advantage	–	104 min	90 min	441 min	100 min	114 min	141 min	–	133 min
Skiing per transfer hour	166 km/h transfer	–	186 km/h transfer	47 km/h transfer	19 km/h transfer	31 km/h transfer	18 km/h transfer	6 km/h transfer	–	1 km/h transfer

Compare ski resorts

Shape the comparison

Start a comparison

Decision summary

Chamonix

Chamonix

Resort overview

Chamonix

Arinsal

Breuil Cervinia

ValFrejus

Saas

Limone Piemonte

Nax

Zuoz

Ceillac en Queyras

Bergun

Detailed comparison