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.

Selected7 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.

7 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

Gais bei Bruneck narrowly leads because of strong terrain match · 84/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence, good reliability match · 66/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence. Bruneck is the strongest alternative. 4 options remain on the Pareto frontier. 2 options have limited evidence coverage.

Balanced profileSummer / glacier
Effectively tied

Gais bei Bruneck

79/100
Why
  1. Gais bei Bruneck narrowly leads because of strong terrain match · 84/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence, good reliability match · 66/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence. Bruneck is the strongest alternative. 4 options remain on the Pareto frontier. 2 options have limited evidence coverage.
Stale evidenceUpdated 1 d ago
  • Strong overall decision score (79/100).

Supporting data are stale; treat the ranking as provisional.

AlternativeBruneck
Main uncertaintyThe lead over Bruneck is small. Some requested evidence is unavailable; the score is rescaled over the evidence that exists. Some selected resorts share the same Kronplatz Plan de Corones ski-area profile.
Would change ifFresh observations or stronger source agreement could materially change the ranking.
Stale evidenceUpdated 1 d ago0.9 pts lead
Next
Open webcamsShow on mapInspect forecast
Detailed comparison reasoningEvidence bridge, trade-offs and decision boundaries
Recommended for this profile

Gais bei Bruneck

Advanced-terrain specialistEffectively tied

Effectively tied with Bruneck. strong terrain match · 84/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence, good reliability match · 66/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence—but the result is close.

Why Gais bei Bruneck leads Bruneck Terrain fit +7.3 pts and Snow reliability +2.1 pts
Access -8.5Terrain fit +7.3Snow reliability +2.1
Incoming snow and Weather stay in the forecast layer unless current/forecast evidence is explicitly part of the Decision score.

Strongest alternativeBruneck

Main uncertaintyThe lead over Bruneck is small. Some requested evidence is unavailable; the score is rescaled over the evidence that exists. Some selected resorts share the same Kronplatz Plan de Corones ski-area profile.

What could change the resultIf snow receives about 50% more weight, Chamonix 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 2–2.

Evidence confidence55%

Coverage and coherence of evidence used by this comparison.

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

3 options are dominated on commonly available dimensions.

Lowest-regret optionChamonix · 94% robustness
Why Gais bei Bruneck leads Bruneck · 0.9 pts
Access-8.5 pts
Terrain+2.4 pts
Snow+2.1 pts
Scale+2.0 pts
Family & value+1.5 pts
Lift system+1.4 pts

Point contributions reconcile the structural Fit dimensions and confidence-limited current opportunity. Missing evidence is not treated as zero.

Priority sensitivity · what can change the winner?
SnowChamonix

If snow receives about 50% more weight, Chamonix becomes the leading option.

TerrainChamonix

If terrain receives about 50% more weight, Chamonix becomes the leading option.

ScaleChamonix

If scale receives about 50% more weight, Chamonix becomes the leading option.

More comparison leadersAdditional category leaders

Resort overview

Trip match is profile-specific. Expand the calculation to see exactly how each score is built.

Shared ski-area data: Gais bei Bruneck, Bruneck, San Vigilio di Marebbe share Kronplatz Plan de Corones. Permanent profile values are identical; current local observations may differ.

Gais bei Bruneck

#1 · Kronplatz Plan de Corones · Italy

Decision79/100
Fit79/100
Now0/100
Quality6.3/10
Now00 cm freshReliability6666/100Terrain8484/100
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.

Fit79.0100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision79.0/100
Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow66/100 · 37% evidence 17.9 / 27.3 pts
Terrain81/100 · 52% evidence 20.2 / 25.0 pts
Scale93/100 · 85% evidence 16.9 / 18.2 pts
Lift system74/100 · 68% evidence 11.8 / 15.9 pts
Family & value89/100 · 41% evidence 12.2 / 13.6 pts
AccessNo data excluded

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 typeAdvanced-terrain specialistBest useFamily trips · 80/100Snow reliabilityModerateSki area125 km · 1,302 m verticalCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group50–149 km · Top 2,000–2,799 m
Strengths
  • Strong terrain match · 84/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence..
  • Good reliability match · 66/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence..
Consider

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

Bruneck

#2 · Kronplatz Plan de Corones · Italy

Decision78/100
Fit78/100
Now0/100
Quality6.3/10
Now00 cm freshReliability6666/100Terrain8484/100Access7191 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.

Fit78.1100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision78.1/100
Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow66/100 · 37% evidence 15.8 / 24.0 pts
Terrain81/100 · 52% evidence 17.8 / 22.0 pts
Scale93/100 · 85% evidence 14.9 / 16.0 pts
Lift system74/100 · 68% evidence 10.4 / 14.0 pts
Access71/100 · 68% evidence 8.5 / 12.0 pts
Family & value89/100 · 41% evidence 10.7 / 12.0 pts

Data coverage: 57%

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 typeAdvanced-terrain specialistBest useAdvanced skiing · 80/100Snow reliabilityModerateSki area125 km · 1,302 m verticalBest transfer91 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group50–149 km · Top 2,000–2,799 m
Strengths
  • Strong terrain match · 84/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence..
  • Good reliability match · 66/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence..
Consider

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

San Vigilio di Marebbe

#3 · Kronplatz Plan de Corones · Italy

Decision77/100
Fit77/100
Now0/100
Quality6.3/10
Now00 cm freshReliability6666/100Terrain8484/100Access65100 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.

Fit77.4100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision77.4/100
Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow66/100 · 37% evidence 15.8 / 24.0 pts
Terrain81/100 · 52% evidence 17.8 / 22.0 pts
Scale93/100 · 85% evidence 14.9 / 16.0 pts
Lift system74/100 · 68% evidence 10.4 / 14.0 pts
Access65/100 · 68% evidence 7.8 / 12.0 pts
Family & value89/100 · 41% evidence 10.7 / 12.0 pts

Data coverage: 57%

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 typeAdvanced-terrain specialistBest useAdvanced skiing · 79/100Snow reliabilityModerateSki area125 km · 1,302 m verticalBest transfer100 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group50–149 km · Top 2,000–2,799 m
Strengths
  • Strong terrain match · 84/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence..
  • Good reliability match · 66/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence..
Consider

Across the commonly available decision dimensions, Kronplatz Plan de Corones is at least as strong and meaningfully better on one or more dimensions.

Chamonix

#4 · Chamonix Valley · France

Decision75/100
Fit82/100
Now29/100
Quality6.0/10
Now29145 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 Now29.214% weight Decision74.8/100
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 snow145 cm 20.7 / 42.9 pts
Fresh snow0 cm 0.0 / 22.9 pts
Valley snow30 cm 3.8 / 22.9 pts
Mid-mountain snow99 cm 4.7 / 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 133% 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..

Breuil Cervinia

#5 · Matterhorn Ski Paradise · Italy

Decision64/100
Fit75/100
Now22/100
Quality9.2/10
Now2275 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.

Fit75.479% weight Now22.021% weight Decision63.9/100
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 snow75 cm 7.5 / 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 snow53 cm 1.8 / 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 40% 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

#6 · 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.

Fuentes de Invierno

#7 · Fuentes de Invierno · Spain

Decision59/100
Fit59/100
Now0/100
Quality–/10
Now00 cm freshReliability5959/100Terrain5959/100
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.

Fit59.2100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision59.2/100
Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow59/100 · 37% evidence 16.0 / 27.3 pts
Terrain60/100 · 44% evidence 14.9 / 25.0 pts
Scale38/100 · 100% evidence 6.9 / 18.2 pts
Lift system64/100 · 68% evidence 10.2 / 15.9 pts
Family & value81/100 · 41% evidence 11.1 / 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 · 66/100Snow reliabilityModerateSki area9 km · 463 m verticalCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group<50 km · Top <2,000 m
Strengths
  • Solid terrain match · 59/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence..
  • Solid reliability match · 59/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence..
Consider

The ski area is comparatively compact.

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
AttributeGais bei BruneckKronplatz Plan de CoronesBruneckKronplatz Plan de CoronesSan Vigilio di MarebbeKronplatz Plan de CoronesChamonixChamonix ValleyBreuil CerviniaMatterhorn Ski ParadiseSaasSaastalFuentes de InviernoFuentes de Invierno
Assessment
Decision score 79/10078/10077/10075/10064/10064/10059/100
Structural Fit 79/10078/10077/10082/10075/10064/10059/100
Current opportunity 0/1000/1000/10029/100clear advantage22/1000/1000/100
Overall quality 6.3/10Shared ski-area valueShared ski-area value6.0/109.2/10clear advantage8.7/10–
Recommendation confidence LowMediumMediumMediumMediumMediumLow
Ski-area profile
Historical snow reliability 60/100Shared ski-area valueShared ski-area value68/10076/10078/10058/100
Typical daytime high 2°CShared ski-area valueShared ski-area value3°C-2°Cclear advantage1°C7°C
Typical snow/freezing level –Shared ski-area valueShared ski-area value––––
Typical overnight low -5°CShared ski-area valueShared ski-area value-4°C-7°C-6°C-5°C
Rating 7.5/10Shared ski-area valueShared ski-area value8.1/108.1/107.4/105.4/10
Area size class 100–150 kmShared ski-area valueShared ski-area value150–250 km250+ km100–150 km20 km or less
Ability profile intermediateShared ski-area valueShared ski-area valueadvancedadvancedadvancedintermediate
Price class avgShared ski-area valueShared ski-area valuehighhighhigh–
Terrain and altitude
Marked pistes 125 kmShared ski-area valueShared ski-area value175 km322 kmclear advantage142 km9 km
Lowest point 973 mShared ski-area valueShared ski-area value1,000 m1,562 m1,472 m1,487 m
Highest point 2,275 mShared ski-area valueShared ski-area value3,842 m3,899 m3,573 m1,950 m
Vertical range 1,302 mShared ski-area valueShared ski-area value2,842 mclear advantage2,337 m2,101 m463 m
Blue pistes 48%Shared ski-area valueShared ski-area value34%23%22%48%
Red pistes 29%Shared ski-area valueShared ski-area value44%68%62%38%
Black pistes 23%Shared ski-area valueShared ski-area value22%8%16%15%
Terrain above 2,000 m –Shared ski-area valueShared ski-area value55%92%clear advantage57%–
Terrain above 3,000 m –Shared ski-area valueShared ski-area value0%21%clear advantage0%–
Piste-mix diversity 96/100Shared ski-area valueShared ski-area value97/10074/10084/10091/100
Slope-angle diversity –Shared ski-area valueShared ski-area value86/100clear advantage51/10068/100–
Very/extremely steep terrain –Shared ski-area valueShared ski-area value21%clear advantage6%2%–
Historical context
Historical snow resilience –Shared ski-area valueShared ski-area value––––
Typical early-winter mountain depth –Shared ski-area valueShared ski-area value––––
Typical core-winter mountain depth –Shared ski-area valueShared ski-area value––––
Typical late-winter mountain depth –Shared ski-area valueShared ski-area value––––
Snow consistency –Shared ski-area valueShared ski-area value––––
Late-winter retention –Shared ski-area valueShared ski-area value––––
Lower-mountain retention –Shared ski-area valueShared ski-area value––––
Warm-winter resilience –Shared ski-area valueShared ski-area value––––
Mountain snow versus typical –––Well above typical+133% vs average · 100th percentileWell below typical-40% vs average · 4th percentile––
Valley snow versus typical ––––Below typical-40% vs average · 58th percentile––
Open slopes versus typical ––––Close to typical-21% vs average · 46th percentile––
Current snow
Valley snow –––30 cm19 cm––
Mid-mountain snow –––99 cmclear advantage53 cm––
Mountain snow –––145 cmclear advantage75 cm––
Fresh snow 0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm
Snow quality ––––9.6/10––
Snow alert 0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm–
Open terrain and lifts
Open slopes ––––7%––
Open lifts –––––––
Lift capacity per piste km 633 pph/kmShared ski-area valueShared ski-area value556 pph/km298 pph/km289 pph/km909 pph/kmclear advantage
Lift-system coverage 0.37×Shared ski-area valueShared ski-area value0.48×clear advantage0.28×0.28×0.30×
Terrain per lift 3.9 km/liftShared ski-area valueShared ski-area value2.5 km/lift6.3 km/lift3.6 km/lift1.8 km/lift
Weather
Minimum temperature 1°C2°C-1°C4°C1°C1°C–
Maximum temperature 6°C14°C4°C11°C9°C6°C–
Suitability and facilities
Family suitability familyShared ski-area valueShared ski-area value––family–
Piste variety slopesShared ski-area valueShared ski-area valueslopesslopesslopes–
Off-piste –Shared ski-area valueShared ski-area valueoffpisteoffpiste––
Cross-country crosscountryShared ski-area valueShared ski-area value––––
Lift network liftsShared ski-area valueShared ski-area value–liftslifts–
Mountain restaurants restaurantsShared ski-area valueShared ski-area value–restaurantsrestaurants–
Après-ski –Shared ski-area valueShared ski-area value–apresskiapresski–
Public transport –Shared ski-area valueShared ski-area valuetransittransit––
Best airport transfer –91 min100 min63 minclear advantage104 min441 min–
Skiing per transfer hour –82 km/h transfer75 km/h transfer166 km/h transfer186 km/h transfer19 km/h transfer–