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.

Selected5 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.

5 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.

Display options
Comparison sections
Decision horizon
Recommendation

Decision summary

Andorra narrowly leads because of good terrain match · 74/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence, good reliability match · 76/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence. Chamonix is the strongest alternative. 3 options remain on the Pareto frontier. 1 option have limited evidence coverage.

Balanced profileSummer / glacier
Effectively tied

Andorra

75/100
Why
  1. Andorra narrowly leads because of good terrain match · 74/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence, good reliability match · 76/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence. Chamonix is the strongest alternative. 3 options remain on the Pareto frontier. 1 option have limited evidence coverage.
Limited evidenceUpdate time unknown
  • Structural fit score: 75/100.

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

AlternativeChamonix
Main uncertaintyThe lead over Chamonix is small. Some 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.
Limited evidenceUpdate time unknown0.0 pts lead
Next
Detailed comparison reasoningEvidence bridge, trade-offs and decision boundaries
Recommended for this profile

Andorra

Large-domain explorerEffectively tied

Effectively tied with Chamonix. good terrain match · 74/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence, good reliability match · 76/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence—but the result is close.

Why Andorra leads Chamonix Terrain fit +6.7 pts and Snow reliability +6.0 pts
Access -8.8Terrain fit +6.7Snow reliability +6.0Snow now -3.9
Incoming snow and Weather stay in the forecast layer unless current/forecast evidence is explicitly part of the Decision score.

Strongest alternativeChamonix

Main uncertaintyThe lead over Chamonix is small. Some requested evidence is unavailable; the score is rescaled over the evidence that exists.

What could change the resultIncrease snow weight from 24 to 25 and Andorra becomes the leading option.

Lead margin0.0pts

Difference between the first and second option.

Ranking stabilityHigh100%

The ranking changes little under nearby priority weights. Rank range 2–3.

Evidence confidence57%

Coverage and coherence of evidence used by this comparison.

Advanced analysisSensitivity, Pareto trade-offs and score contributions
Pareto frontier3 options

2 options are dominated on commonly available dimensions.

Lowest-regret optionChamonix · 94% robustness
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.

SnowAndorra

Increase snow weight from 24 to 25 and Andorra becomes the leading option.

24 → 25
Family & valueAndorra

Increase family & value weight from 12 to 13 and Andorra becomes the leading option.

12 → 13
TerrainAndorra

Reduce terrain weight from 22 to 21 and Andorra becomes the leading option.

22 → 21
ScaleAndorra

Reduce scale weight from 16 to 15 and Andorra becomes the leading option.

16 → 15
Why Andorra leads Chamonix · 0.0 pts
Access-8.8 pts
Snow+6.0 pts
Family & value+4.0 pts
Current opportunity-3.9 pts
Terrain+1.4 pts
Scale+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.

Andorra

#1 · Grand Valira · Andorra

Decision75/100
Fit75/100
Now–/100
Quality6.4/10
Reliability7676/100Terrain7474/100
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.

Fit74.6100% weight Now–0% weight Decision74.6/100
Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow76/100 · 37% evidence 20.6 / 27.3 pts
Terrain71/100 · 52% evidence 17.8 / 25.0 pts
Scale82/100 · 100% evidence 14.9 / 18.2 pts
Lift system58/100 · 68% evidence 9.2 / 15.9 pts
Family & value89/100 · 41% evidence 12.2 / 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 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 useFamily trips · 77/100Snow reliabilityModerateSki area215 km · 930 m verticalCurrent dataNo current updatePeer group150–299 km · Top 2,000–2,799 m
Strengths
  • Good terrain match · 74/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence..
  • Good reliability match · 76/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence..
Consider

Scale trails the selected-set median by 15 points.

Chamonix

#2 · 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 Decision74.6/100
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..

Chamrousse

#3 · Chamrousse · France

Decision67/100
Fit67/100
Now0/100
Quality9.2/10
Now00 cm freshReliability6262/100Terrain6363/100Access9844 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.

Fit66.6100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision66.6/100
Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow62/100 · 73% evidence 14.8 / 24.0 pts
Terrain72/100 · 80% evidence 15.9 / 22.0 pts
Scale76/100 · 100% evidence 12.2 / 16.0 pts
Lift system26/100 · 68% evidence 3.6 / 14.0 pts
Access98/100 · 68% evidence 11.7 / 12.0 pts
Family & value69/100 · 41% evidence 8.3 / 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 typeAccess-led destinationBest useShort breaks · 67/100Snow reliabilityVery highSki area90 km · 850 m verticalTerrain >2,000 m27%Best transfer44 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group50–149 km · Top 2,000–2,799 m
Strengths
  • Solid terrain match · 63/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale..
  • Solid reliability match · 62/100 — led by strong snow resilience..
Consider

Lift-system evidence is less convincing.

Breuil Cervinia

#4 · 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

#5 · 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.

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
AttributeAndorraGrand ValiraChamonixChamonix ValleyChamrousseChamrousseBreuil CerviniaMatterhorn Ski ParadiseSaasSaastal
Assessment
Decision score 75/10075/10067/10065/10064/100
Structural Fit 75/10082/100clear advantage67/10075/10064/100
Current opportunity –29/1000/10025/1000/100
Overall quality 6.4/106.0/109.2/109.2/108.7/10
Recommendation confidence LowMediumMediumMediumMedium
Ski-area profile
Historical snow reliability 59/10068/10073/10076/10078/100
Typical daytime high 4°C3°C0°C-2°Cclear advantage1°C
Typical snow/freezing level –––––
Typical overnight low -2°C-4°C-7°C-7°C-6°C
Rating 8.1/108.1/107.0/108.1/107.4/10
Area size class 150–250 km150–250 km50–100 km250+ km100–150 km
Ability profile intermediateadvancedadvancedadvancedadvanced
Price class lowhighlowhighhigh
Terrain and altitude
Marked pistes 215 km175 km90 km322 kmclear advantage142 km
Lowest point 1,710 m1,000 m1,400 m1,562 m1,472 m
Highest point 2,640 m3,842 m2,250 m3,899 m3,573 m
Vertical range 930 m2,842 mclear advantage850 m2,337 m2,101 m
Blue pistes 47%34%28%23%22%
Red pistes 38%44%50%68%62%
Black pistes 15%22%22%8%16%
Terrain above 2,000 m –55%27%92%clear advantage57%
Terrain above 3,000 m –0%0%21%clear advantage0%
Piste-mix diversity 92/10097/10094/10074/10084/100
Slope-angle diversity –86/100clear advantage39/10051/10068/100
Very/extremely steep terrain –21%clear advantage4%6%2%
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 cm
Snow quality –––9.6/10–
Snow alert –0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm
Open terrain and lifts
Open slopes –––7%–
Open lifts –––––
Lift capacity per piste km 538 pph/km556 pph/km309 pph/km298 pph/km289 pph/km
Lift-system coverage 0.25×0.48×clear advantage0.17×0.28×0.28×
Terrain per lift 2.9 km/lift2.5 km/lift5.6 km/lift6.3 km/lift3.6 km/lift
Weather
Minimum temperature –3°C4°C-1°C-1°C
Maximum temperature –10°C7°C3°C7°C
Suitability and facilities
Family suitability ––family–family
Piste variety slopesslopesslopesslopesslopes
Off-piste –offpiste–offpiste–
Cross-country –––––
Lift network lifts––liftslifts
Mountain restaurants restaurants––restaurantsrestaurants
Après-ski –––apresskiapresski
Public transport –transittransittransit–
Best airport transfer –63 min44 min104 min441 min
Skiing per transfer hour –166 km/h transfer123 km/h transfer186 km/h transfer19 km/h transfer