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.

Selected9 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.

9 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. Disentis Sedrun is the strongest alternative. 5 options remain on the Pareto frontier. 3 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. Disentis Sedrun is the strongest alternative. 5 options remain on the Pareto frontier. 3 options have limited evidence coverage.
Stale evidenceUpdated 1 d ago
  • Strong structural fit for the selected priorities (82/100).
  • Solid upper-mountain snow base at 145 cm.

Supporting data are stale; treat the ranking as provisional.

AlternativeDisentis Sedrun
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.
Stale evidenceUpdated 1 d ago9.6 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 Disentis Sedrun Terrain fit +5.3 pts and Snow now +3.9 pts
Terrain fit +5.3Snow now +3.9Access +3.6Snow reliability -3.2
Incoming snow and Weather stay in the forecast layer unless current/forecast evidence is explicitly part of the Decision score.

Strongest alternativeDisentis Sedrun

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

What could change the resultThe recommendation remains first under the tested nearby priority shifts in the available evidence.

Lead margin9.6pts

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 frontier5 options

2 options are dominated on commonly available dimensions.

Why Chamonix leads Disentis Sedrun · 9.6 pts
Lift system+6.6 pts
Current opportunity+3.9 pts
Access+3.6 pts
Snow-3.2 pts
Terrain-1.6 pts
Scale+0.6 pts

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

Priority sensitivity

The leading resort remains first under moderate one-criterion weighting shifts in the available evidence.

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
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.

Fit81.987% weight Now29.213% 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..

Disentis Sedrun

#2 · Disentis 3000 · Switzerland

Decision65/100
Fit65/100
Now0/100
Quality6.5/10
Now00 cm freshReliability7474/100Terrain6666/100Access43122 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.

Fit65.2100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision65.2/100
Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow74/100 · 37% evidence 17.8 / 24.0 pts
Terrain82/100 · 52% evidence 18.0 / 22.0 pts
Scale81/100 · 100% evidence 13.0 / 16.0 pts
Lift system19/100 · 68% evidence 2.7 / 14.0 pts
Access43/100 · 68% evidence 5.2 / 12.0 pts
Family & value71/100 · 41% evidence 8.5 / 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 typeLarge-domain explorerBest useAdvanced skiing · 71/100Snow reliabilityModerateSki area60 km · 1,606 m verticalBest transfer122 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group50–149 km · Top 2,800+ m
Strengths
  • Good terrain match · 66/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence..
  • Good reliability match · 74/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence..
Consider

Lift-system evidence is less convincing.

Breuil Cervinia

#3 · 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 Decision64.0/100
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

#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.

Adelboden

#5 · Adelboden Lenk · Switzerland

Decision56/100
Fit66/100
Now15/100
Quality6.8/10
Now1515 cm upperReliability5353/100Terrain6666/100Access8662 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.

Fit65.581% weight Now15.319% weight Decision56.2/100
Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow53/100 · 73% evidence 12.8 / 24.0 pts
Terrain60/100 · 80% evidence 13.2 / 22.0 pts
Scale78/100 · 100% evidence 12.4 / 16.0 pts
Lift system45/100 · 68% evidence 6.3 / 14.0 pts
Access86/100 · 68% evidence 10.3 / 12.0 pts
Family & value87/100 · 41% evidence 10.4 / 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 snow15 cm 1.7 / 33.3 pts
Open terrain60% 13.3 / 22.2 pts
Fresh snow0 cm 0.0 / 17.8 pts
Valley snow0 cm 0.0 / 17.8 pts
Mid-mountain snow9 cm 0.3 / 8.9 pts
Snow qualityNo data excluded

Data coverage: 90%

Destination typeFamily progression baseBest useFamily trips · 70/100Snow reliabilityMarginalSki area86 km · 940 m verticalTerrain >2,000 m10%Best transfer62 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group50–149 km · Top 2,000–2,799 mCalendar contextMountain snow is 73% below the available five-year level for this point in the season.
Strengths
  • Good terrain match · 66/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale..
  • Solid reliability match · 53/100 — led by strong snow resilience..
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.

Anger

#7 · Anger · Germany

Decision29/100
Fit29/100
Now0/100
Quality–/10
Now00 cm freshReliability1515/100Terrain3535/100
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.

Fit29.4100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision29.4/100
Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow15/100 · 37% evidence 4.0 / 27.3 pts
Terrain0/100 · 31% evidence 0.0 / 25.0 pts
Scale7/100 · 100% evidence 1.2 / 18.2 pts
Lift system86/100 · 68% evidence 13.6 / 15.9 pts
Family & value77/100 · 31% evidence 10.6 / 13.6 pts
AccessNo data excluded

Data coverage: 45%

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 typeLift-system performerBest useFamily trips · 47/100Snow reliabilityLowSki area0 km · 16 m verticalCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group<50 km · Top <2,000 m
Strengths
  • Mixed terrain match · 35/100 — led by strong lift-system evidence and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence..
  • Mixed reliability match · 15/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence..
Consider

Terrain depth is less distinctive.

Breitenbrunn

#8 · Breitenbrunn · Austria

Decision18/100
Fit18/100
Now0/100
Quality–/10
Now00 cm freshReliability1919/100Terrain1818/100
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.

Fit18.0100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision18.0/100
Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow19/100 · 36% evidence 6.0 / 32.4 pts
Terrain33/100 · 15% evidence 9.9 / 29.7 pts
Scale9/100 · 58% evidence 2.0 / 21.6 pts
Family & value0/100 · 18% evidence 0.0 / 16.2 pts
AccessNo data excluded
Lift systemNo data excluded

Data coverage: 23%

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 destinationSnow reliabilityLowSki area1 km · – verticalCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group<50 km · Top <2,000 m
Strengths
  • Mixed terrain match · 18/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence..
  • Mixed reliability match · 19/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence..
Consider

Snow resilience is less distinctive.

Chironico

#9 · · 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 ValleyDisentis SedrunDisentis 3000Breuil CerviniaMatterhorn Ski ParadiseSaasSaastalAdelbodenAdelboden LenkFalkertFalkertAngerAngerBreitenbrunnBreitenbrunnChironicoSwitzerland
Assessment
Decision score 75/100clear advantage65/10064/10064/10056/10048/10029/10018/100–
Structural Fit 82/100clear advantage65/10075/10064/10066/10048/10029/10018/100–
Current opportunity 29/100clear advantage0/10022/1000/10015/1000/1000/1000/100–
Overall quality 6.0/106.5/109.2/10clear advantage8.7/106.8/108.0/10–––
Recommendation confidence MediumMediumMediumMediumMediumMediumLowLowLow
Ski-area profile
Historical snow reliability 68/10054/10076/10078/10044/10070/10027/10025/100–
Typical daytime high 3°C2°C-2°C1°C4°C-3°C5°C4°C–
Typical snow/freezing level –––––––––
Typical overnight low -4°C-5°C-7°C-6°C-4°C-9°C-4°C-2°C–
Rating 8.1/106.1/108.1/107.4/107.3/104.6/104.6/10––
Area size class 150–250 km50–100 km250+ km100–150 km50–100 km20 km or less20 km or less20 km or less–
Ability profile advancedadvancedadvancedadvancedintermediateadvancednoviceadvanced–
Price class highhighhighhighhighlowlowlow–
Terrain and altitude
Marked pistes 175 km60 km322 kmclear advantage142 km86 km11 km0 km1 km–
Lowest point 1,000 m1,227 m1,562 m1,472 m1,260 m1,840 mclear advantage670 m––
Highest point 3,842 m2,833 m3,899 m3,573 m2,200 m2,107 m686 m860 m–
Vertical range 2,842 mclear advantage1,606 m2,337 m2,101 m940 m267 m16 m––
Blue pistes 34%33%23%22%53%27%100%0%–
Red pistes 44%50%68%62%40%73%0%100%–
Black pistes 22%clear advantage17%8%16%7%0%0%0%–
Terrain above 2,000 m 55%–92%clear advantage57%10%45%–––
Terrain above 3,000 m 0%–21%clear advantage0%0%0%–––
Piste-mix diversity 97/10092/10074/10084/10081/10085/100–––
Slope-angle diversity 86/100clear advantage–51/10068/10037/10041/100–––
Very/extremely steep terrain 21%clear advantage–6%2%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+133% vs average · 100th percentile–Well below typical-40% vs average · 4th percentile–Well below typical-73% vs average · 0th percentile––––
Valley snow versus typical ––Below typical-40% vs average · 58th percentile–Close to typical-100% vs average · 0th percentile––––
Open slopes versus typical ––Close to typical-21% vs average · 46th percentile––––––
Current snow
Valley snow 30 cm–19 cm–0 cm––––
Mid-mountain snow 99 cmclear advantage–53 cm–9 cm––––
Mountain snow 145 cmclear advantage–75 cm–15 cm––––
Fresh snow 0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm–
Snow quality ––9.6/10––––––
Snow alert 0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm
Open terrain and lifts
Open slopes ––7%–60%clear advantage––––
Open lifts –––––––––
Lift capacity per piste km 556 pph/km245 pph/km298 pph/km289 pph/km392 pph/km338 pph/km2,500 pph/kmclear advantage––
Lift-system coverage 0.48×0.20×0.28×0.28×0.25×0.25×1.00×clear advantage––
Terrain per lift 2.5 km/lift5.0 km/lift6.3 km/lift3.6 km/lift3.9 km/lift2.8 km/lift0.2 km/lift––
Weather
Minimum temperature 4°C2°C1°C1°C3°C-4°C6°C2°C5°C
Maximum temperature 11°C11°C9°C6°C10°C-2°C10°C9°C12°C
Suitability and facilities
Family suitability –family–familyfamilyfamily–––
Piste variety slopes–slopesslopesslopes––––
Off-piste offpiste–offpiste––––––
Cross-country –––––––––
Lift network –liftsliftsliftslifts––––
Mountain restaurants ––restaurantsrestaurantsrestaurants––––
Après-ski ––apresskiapresskiapresski––––
Public transport transit–transit–transit––––
Best airport transfer 63 min122 min104 min441 min62 min136 min–––
Skiing per transfer hour 166 km/h transfer30 km/h transfer186 km/h transfer19 km/h transfer83 km/h transfer5 km/h transfer–––