Skip to main content
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
Comparison workspace

Shape the comparison

Set the comparison priorities, then inspect which selected resort fits best and what could change the result.

10 of 10 selected
Export
Add resorts

Balances permanent quality, snow reliability, terrain and current conditions.

Tune prioritiesBalanced
Decision weights

Missing resort data remain eligible: unavailable evidence is omitted and confidence falls instead of the resort receiving a zero.

More comparison optionsTrip context · direct add · display
Fit = structural suitabilityNow = current opportunityDecision combines both when timing makes current conditions relevant
How Benchmark works

Priorities determine the structural ranking; optional trip context refines those priorities without excluding a resort. Evidence describes data support, Stability tests nearby priority changes, and Frontier marks a non-dominated option on comparable evidence.

Trip contextOptional

Use these only when they matter for this trip. They adjust ranking and interpretation; they are not hidden filters.

Travel origin is preserved with the decision state; access scoring uses the selected arrival hub when one is chosen.
Display options
Comparison sections
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. Mariapfarr is the strongest alternative. 4 options remain on the Pareto frontier. 5 options have limited evidence coverage.

Balanced profileSummer / glacier
Recommended

Chamonix

75/100
Why
  1. 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. Mariapfarr is the strongest alternative. 4 options remain on the Pareto frontier. 5 options have limited evidence coverage.
Mixed evidenceUpdated 22 h ago
  • Strong structural fit for the selected priorities (82/100).
  • Solid upper-mountain snow base at 142 cm.
AlternativeMariapfarr
Main uncertaintyMost 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.
Mixed evidenceUpdated 22 h ago8.0 pts lead
Next
Open webcamsShow on mapInspect forecast
Detailed comparison reasoningEvidence bridge, trade-offs and decision boundaries
Recommended for this profile

Chamonix

Advanced-terrain specialistLow-regret choice

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 Mariapfarr Access +8.8 pts and Snow now +3.9 pts
Access +8.8Snow reliability -4.7Snow now +3.9Terrain fit +0.1
Incoming snow and Weather stay in the forecast layer unless current/forecast evidence is explicitly part of the Decision score.

Strongest alternativeMariapfarr

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

What could change the resultIncrease family & value weight from 12 to 46 and Mariapfarr becomes the leading option.

Lead margin8.0pts

Difference between the first and second option.

Ranking stabilityHigh100%

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

Evidence confidence73%

Coverage and coherence of evidence used by this comparison.

Advanced analysisSensitivity, Pareto trade-offs and score contributions
Pareto frontier4 options

5 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.

Family & valueMariapfarr

Increase family & value weight from 12 to 46 and Mariapfarr becomes the leading option.

12 → 46
SnowBreuil Cervinia

Increase snow weight from 24 to 97 and Breuil Cervinia becomes the leading option.

24 → 97
Why Chamonix leads Mariapfarr · 8.0 pts
Access+8.8 pts
Lift system+4.8 pts
Snow-4.7 pts
Family & value-4.6 pts
Current opportunity+3.9 pts
Terrain-2.5 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

Decision75/100
Fit82/100
Now29/100
Quality6.0/10
Now29142 cm upperReliability7171/100Terrain8686/100Access8563 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.

Fit81.986% weight Now28.714% weight Decision74.7/100
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.

Mountain snow142 cm 20.3 / 42.9 pts
Fresh snow0 cm 0.0 / 22.9 pts
Valley snow30 cm 3.8 / 22.9 pts
Mid-mountain snow97 cm 4.6 / 11.4 pts
Open terrainNo data excluded
Snow qualityNo data excluded

Data coverage: 70%

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+ mCalendar contextMountain snow is 109% above the available five-year level for this point in the season.
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..

Mariapfarr

#2 · Fanningberg · Austria

Decision67/100
Fit67/100
Now0/100
Quality8.5/10
Now00 cm freshReliability7171/100Terrain6565/100
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.

Fit66.7100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision66.7/100
Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow71/100 · 37% evidence 19.3 / 27.3 pts
Terrain76/100 · 52% evidence 18.9 / 25.0 pts
Scale62/100 · 100% evidence 11.2 / 18.2 pts
Lift system28/100 · 68% evidence 4.4 / 15.9 pts
Family & value94/100 · 28% evidence 12.8 / 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 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 area24 km · 618 m verticalCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group<50 km · Top 2,000–2,799 m
Strengths
  • Good terrain match · 65/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence..
  • Good reliability match · 71/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence..
Consider

Lift-system evidence is less convincing.

Breuil Cervinia

#3 · Matterhorn Ski Paradise · Italy

Decision65/100
Fit75/100
Now25/100
Quality9.2/10
Now25100 cm upperReliability9494/100Terrain7171/100Access61104 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.

Fit75.478% weight Now25.022% weight Decision64.5/100
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.

Mountain snow100 cm 10.0 / 30.0 pts
Open terrain7% 1.4 / 20.0 pts
Fresh snow0 cm 0.0 / 16.0 pts
Valley snow19 cm 1.7 / 16.0 pts
Snow quality9.6/10 9.6 / 10.0 pts
Mid-mountain snow68 cm 2.3 / 8.0 pts

Data coverage: 100%

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+ mCalendar contextMountain snow is 20% below the available five-year level for this point in the season.
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.

Saas

#4 · Saastal · Switzerland

Decision64/100
Fit64/100
Now0/100
Quality8.7/10
Now00 cm freshReliability7474/100Terrain7070/100Access10441 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 Now0.00% 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 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 · 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.

Klewenalp

#5 · Klewenalp Stockhutte · Switzerland

Decision58/100
Fit58/100
Now0/100
Quality4.2/10
Now00 cm freshReliability5454/100Terrain6060/100
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.

Fit58.3100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision58.3/100
Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow54/100 · 37% evidence 14.8 / 27.3 pts
Terrain58/100 · 52% evidence 14.4 / 25.0 pts
Scale67/100 · 100% evidence 12.1 / 18.2 pts
Lift system40/100 · 68% evidence 6.4 / 15.9 pts
Family & value78/100 · 41% evidence 10.6 / 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 typeFamily-led destinationBest useFamily trips · 62/100Snow reliabilityModerateSki area40 km · 739 m verticalCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group<50 km · Top <2,000 m
Strengths
  • Solid terrain match · 60/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence..
  • Solid reliability match · 54/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence..
Consider

Lift-system evidence is less convincing.

Falkert

#6 · Falkert · Austria

Decision48/100
Fit48/100
Now0/100
Quality8.0/10
Now00 cm freshReliability6363/100Terrain4646/100Access29136 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.

Fit48.1100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision48.1/100
Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow63/100 · 73% evidence 15.0 / 24.0 pts
Terrain52/100 · 80% evidence 11.5 / 22.0 pts
Scale44/100 · 100% evidence 7.0 / 16.0 pts
Lift system28/100 · 68% evidence 4.0 / 14.0 pts
Access29/100 · 68% evidence 3.5 / 12.0 pts
Family & value59/100 · 41% evidence 7.1 / 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 typeBalanced all-rounderBest useSnow-first trips · 53/100Snow reliabilityVery highSki area11 km · 267 m verticalTerrain >2,000 m45%Best transfer136 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group<50 km · Top 2,000–2,799 m
Strengths
  • Mixed terrain match · 46/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale..
  • Solid reliability match · 63/100 — led by strong snow resilience..
Consider

Lift-system evidence is less convincing.

Gerardmer

#7 · Gerardmer · France

Decision48/100
Fit48/100
Now0/100
Quality3.5/10
Now00 cm freshReliability2323/100Terrain5656/100Access57104 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.

Fit47.9100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision47.9/100
Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow23/100 · 37% evidence 5.4 / 24.0 pts
Terrain43/100 · 52% evidence 9.5 / 22.0 pts
Scale57/100 · 100% evidence 9.2 / 16.0 pts
Lift system50/100 · 68% evidence 6.9 / 14.0 pts
Access57/100 · 68% evidence 6.9 / 12.0 pts
Family & value83/100 · 41% evidence 10.0 / 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 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 · 56/100Snow reliabilityLowSki area35 km · 370 m verticalBest transfer104 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group<50 km · Top <2,000 m
Strengths
  • Solid terrain match · 56/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence..
  • Mixed reliability match · 23/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence..
Consider

Snow resilience is less distinctive.

Freudenstadt

#8 · Freudenstadt · Germany

Decision47/100
Fit47/100
Now0/100
Quality3.0/10
Now00 cm freshReliability3838/100Terrain4747/100Access6269 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.

Fit46.7100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision46.7/100
Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow38/100 · 37% evidence 9.1 / 24.0 pts
Terrain57/100 · 52% evidence 12.5 / 22.0 pts
Scale39/100 · 85% evidence 6.2 / 16.0 pts
Lift system13/100 · 8% evidence 1.8 / 14.0 pts
Access62/100 · 68% evidence 7.4 / 12.0 pts
Family & value80/100 · 41% evidence 9.6 / 12.0 pts

Data coverage: 48%

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 · 53/100Snow reliabilityLowSki area3 km · 1,009 m verticalBest transfer69 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group<50 km · Top <2,000 m
Strengths
  • Mixed terrain match · 47/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence..
  • Mixed reliability match · 38/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence..
Consider

Snow resilience is less distinctive.

Walchensee

#9 · Walchensee · Germany

Decision47/100
Fit47/100
Now0/100
Quality–/10
Now00 cm freshReliability3333/100Terrain5252/100
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.

Fit46.6100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision46.6/100
Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow33/100 · 37% evidence 8.9 / 27.3 pts
Terrain70/100 · 44% evidence 17.4 / 25.0 pts
Scale41/100 · 85% evidence 7.4 / 18.2 pts
Lift system40/100 · 8% evidence 6.3 / 15.9 pts
Family & value49/100 · 41% evidence 6.6 / 13.6 pts
AccessNo data excluded

Data coverage: 38%

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 · 52/100Snow reliabilityLowSki area6 km · 777 m verticalCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group<50 km · Top <2,000 m
Strengths
  • Mixed terrain match · 52/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence..
  • Mixed reliability match · 33/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence..
Consider

Snow resilience is less distinctive.

Frauenfeld

#10 · · Switzerland

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.

Scroll horizontally to compare resortsThe attribute column stays visible
AttributeChamonixChamonix ValleyMariapfarrFanningbergBreuil CerviniaMatterhorn Ski ParadiseSaasSaastalKlewenalpKlewenalp StockhutteFalkertFalkertGerardmerGerardmerFreudenstadtFreudenstadtWalchenseeWalchenseeFrauenfeldSwitzerland
Assessment
Decision score 75/100clear advantage67/10065/10064/10058/10048/10048/10047/10047/100–
Structural Fit 82/100clear advantage67/10075/10064/10058/10048/10048/10047/10047/100–
Current opportunity 29/1000/10025/1000/1000/1000/1000/1000/1000/100–
Overall quality 6.0/108.5/109.2/10clear advantage8.7/104.2/108.0/103.5/103.0/10––
Recommendation confidence MediumLowMediumMediumLowMediumMediumLowLowLow
Ski-area profile
Historical snow reliability 68/10077/10076/10078/10050/10070/10021/10038/10023/100–
Typical daytime high 3°C1°C-2°C1°C6°C-3°C4°C4°C5°C–
Typical snow/freezing level ––––––––––
Typical overnight low -4°C-5°C-7°C-6°C-1°C-9°C0°C-1°C-3°C–
Rating 8.1/10–8.1/107.4/106.7/104.6/106.5/104.4/104.6/10–
Area size class 150–250 km20–50 km250+ km100–150 km20–50 km20 km or less20–50 km20 km or less20 km or less–
Ability profile advancedexpertadvancedadvancedadvancedadvancednovicenoviceadvanced–
Price class highlowhighhighhighlowlowavglow–
Terrain and altitude
Marked pistes 175 km24 km322 kmclear advantage142 km40 km11 km35 km3 km6 km–
Lowest point 1,000 m1,497 m1,562 m1,472 m1,199 m1,840 mclear advantage770 m591 m823 m–
Highest point 3,842 m2,115 m3,899 m3,573 m1,938 m2,107 m1,140 m1,600 m1,600 m–
Vertical range 2,842 mclear advantage618 m2,337 m2,101 m739 m267 m370 m1,009 m777 m–
Blue pistes 34%46%23%22%38%27%60%67%17%–
Red pistes 44%24%68%62%63%73%34%33%67%–
Black pistes 22%30%clear advantage8%16%0%0%6%0%17%–
Terrain above 2,000 m 55%–92%clear advantage57%–45%––––
Terrain above 3,000 m 0%–21%clear advantage0%–0%––––
Piste-mix diversity 97/10097/10074/10084/10095/10085/10076/10092/10079/100–
Slope-angle diversity 86/100clear advantage–51/10068/100–41/100––––
Very/extremely steep terrain 21%clear advantage–6%2%–4%––––
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 Well above typical+109% vs average · 92th percentile–Below typical-20% vs average · 23th percentile–––––––
Valley snow versus typical ––Below typical-41% vs average · 57th percentile–––––––
Open slopes versus typical ––Close to typical-21% vs average · 45th percentile–––––––
Current snow
Valley snow 30 cm–19 cm–––––––
Mid-mountain snow 97 cmclear advantage–68 cm–––––––
Mountain snow 142 cmclear advantage–100 cm–––––––
Fresh snow 0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm–
Snow quality ––9.6/10–––––––
Snow alert 0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm
Open terrain and lifts
Open slopes ––7%–––––––
Open lifts ––––––––––
Lift capacity per piste km 556 pph/km348 pph/km298 pph/km289 pph/km381 pph/km338 pph/km544 pph/km–––
Lift-system coverage 0.48×clear advantage0.22×0.28×0.28×0.28×0.25×0.24×–––
Terrain per lift 2.5 km/lift4.0 km/lift6.3 km/lift3.6 km/lift2.7 km/lift2.8 km/lift1.8 km/lift1.5 km/lift1.2 km/lift–
Weather
Minimum temperature 3°C0°C1°C-1°C1°C0°C5°C2°C3°C5°C
Maximum temperature 10°C10°C7°C8°C4°C5°C11°C8°C9°C10°C
Suitability and facilities
Family suitability –family–familyfamilyfamily––––
Piste variety slopes–slopesslopes––––––
Off-piste offpiste–offpiste–––––––
Cross-country ––––––––––
Lift network –liftsliftslifts––––––
Mountain restaurants ––restaurantsrestaurants––––––
Après-ski ––apresskiapresski––––––
Public transport transit–transit–transit––transit––
Best airport transfer 63 min–104 min441 min–136 min104 min69 min––
Skiing per transfer hour 166 km/h transfer–186 km/h transfer19 km/h transfer–5 km/h transfer20 km/h transfer3 km/h transfer––