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.

Selected8 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.

8 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 narrowly leads 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. Garmisch Partenkirchen is the strongest alternative. 6 options remain on the Pareto frontier. 1 option have limited evidence coverage.

Balanced profileSummer / glacier
Effectively tied

Chamonix

75/100
Why
  1. Chamonix narrowly leads 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. Garmisch Partenkirchen is the strongest alternative. 6 options remain on the Pareto frontier. 1 option 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.

AlternativeGarmisch Partenkirchen
Main uncertaintyThe lead over Garmisch Partenkirchen is small. Most 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 ago1.9 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 choiceEffectively tied

Effectively tied with Garmisch Partenkirchen. 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—but the result is close.

Why Chamonix leads Garmisch Partenkirchen Snow now +4.0 pts and Snow reliability +1.6 pts
Snow now +4.0Terrain fit -2.5Snow reliability +1.6Access -1.1
Incoming snow and Weather stay in the forecast layer unless current/forecast evidence is explicitly part of the Decision score.

Strongest alternativeGarmisch Partenkirchen

Main uncertaintyThe lead over Garmisch Partenkirchen is small. Most of the evidence requested by this priority profile is available.

What could change the resultReduce snow weight from 24 to 6 and Garmisch Partenkirchen becomes the leading option.

Lead margin1.9pts

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 frontier6 options

2 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.

SnowGarmisch Partenkirchen

Reduce snow weight from 24 to 6 and Garmisch Partenkirchen becomes the leading option.

24 → 6
Lift systemGarmisch Partenkirchen

Increase lift system weight from 14 to 33 and Garmisch Partenkirchen becomes the leading option.

14 → 33
AccessGarmisch Partenkirchen

Increase access weight from 12 to 49 and Garmisch Partenkirchen becomes the leading option.

12 → 49
Why Chamonix leads Garmisch Partenkirchen · 1.9 pts
Current opportunity+4.0 pts
Lift system-1.9 pts
Snow+1.6 pts
Access-1.1 pts
Scale-0.8 pts
Terrain+0.4 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
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..

Garmisch Partenkirchen

#2 · Garmisch Partenkirchen · Germany

Decision73/100
Fit73/100
Now0/100
Quality6.5/10
Now00 cm freshReliability5454/100Terrain7878/100Access8362 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.

Fit72.9100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision72.9/100
Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow54/100 · 73% evidence 13.0 / 24.0 pts
Terrain73/100 · 80% evidence 16.0 / 22.0 pts
Scale90/100 · 85% evidence 14.4 / 16.0 pts
Lift system80/100 · 68% evidence 11.2 / 14.0 pts
Access83/100 · 68% evidence 9.9 / 12.0 pts
Family & value70/100 · 41% evidence 8.4 / 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 useShort breaks · 74/100Snow reliabilityHighSki area61 km · 1,920 m verticalTerrain >2,000 m0%Best transfer62 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group50–149 km · Top 2,000–2,799 m
Strengths
  • Strong terrain match · 78/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale..
  • Solid reliability match · 54/100 — led by strong snow resilience..

Flaine

#3 · Le Grand Massif · France

Decision65/100
Fit70/100
Now27/100
Quality4.2/10
Now27160 cm upperReliability6262/100Terrain7272/100Access8273 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.

Fit70.486% weight Now27.414% weight Decision64.6/100
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
Terrain71/100 · 80% evidence 15.6 / 22.0 pts
Scale89/100 · 100% evidence 14.3 / 16.0 pts
Lift system39/100 · 68% evidence 5.4 / 14.0 pts
Access82/100 · 68% evidence 9.8 / 12.0 pts
Family & value87/100 · 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.

Mountain snow160 cm 22.9 / 42.9 pts
Fresh snow0 cm 0.0 / 22.9 pts
Valley snow0 cm 0.0 / 22.9 pts
Mid-mountain snow96 cm 4.6 / 11.4 pts
Open terrainNo data excluded
Snow qualityNo data excluded

Data coverage: 70%

Destination typeLarge-domain explorerBest useFamily trips · 73/100Snow reliabilityHighSki area265 km · 1,783 m verticalTerrain >2,000 m24%Best transfer73 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group150–299 km · Top 2,000–2,799 mCalendar contextMountain snow is 321% above the available five-year level for this point in the season.
Strengths
  • Good terrain match · 72/100 — 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

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.

Fit75.478% weight Now22.022% 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

#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.

Fellhorn

#6 · Walmendingerhorn Ifen Heuberg · Germany

Decision62/100
Fit62/100
Now0/100
Quality6.8/10
Now00 cm freshReliability5050/100Terrain6262/100Access8756 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.

Fit62.1100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision62.1/100
Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow50/100 · 73% evidence 11.9 / 24.0 pts
Terrain56/100 · 80% evidence 12.3 / 22.0 pts
Scale74/100 · 100% evidence 11.9 / 16.0 pts
Lift system39/100 · 68% evidence 5.4 / 14.0 pts
Access87/100 · 68% evidence 10.5 / 12.0 pts
Family & value85/100 · 41% evidence 10.2 / 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 typeFamily progression baseBest useFamily trips · 67/100Snow reliabilityVery highSki area34 km · 876 m verticalTerrain >2,000 m0%Best transfer56 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group<50 km · Top <2,000 m
Strengths
  • Solid terrain match · 62/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale..
  • Mixed reliability match · 50/100 — led by strong snow resilience..
Consider

Lift-system evidence is less convincing.

Flachau

#7 · Snow Space Salzburg · Austria

Decision59/100
Fit68/100
Now1/100
Quality6.0/10
Now15 cm upperReliability4848/100Terrain7272/100Access8567 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.

Fit67.786% weight Now0.914% weight Decision58.7/100
Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow48/100 · 73% evidence 11.5 / 24.0 pts
Terrain57/100 · 80% evidence 12.4 / 22.0 pts
Scale92/100 · 100% evidence 14.7 / 16.0 pts
Lift system80/100 · 68% evidence 11.1 / 14.0 pts
Access85/100 · 68% evidence 10.2 / 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 snow5 cm 0.7 / 42.9 pts
Fresh snow0 cm 0.0 / 22.9 pts
Valley snow0 cm 0.0 / 22.9 pts
Mid-mountain snow3 cm 0.1 / 11.4 pts
Open terrainNo data excluded
Snow qualityNo data excluded

Data coverage: 70%

Destination typeEfficient short-break baseBest useShort breaks · 71/100Snow reliabilityHighSki area120 km · 1,240 m verticalTerrain >2,000 m0%Best transfer67 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group50–149 km · Top <2,000 mCalendar contextMountain snow is 83% below the available five-year level for this point in the season.
Strengths
  • Good terrain match · 72/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale..
  • Mixed reliability match · 48/100 — led by strong snow resilience..
Consider

Snow resilience is less distinctive.

La Colmiane

#8 · La Colmiane · France

Decision46/100
Fit46/100
Now–/100
Quality–/10
Reliability4444/100Terrain4646/100
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.

Fit45.5100% weight Now–0% weight Decision45.5/100
Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow44/100 · 37% evidence 12.0 / 27.3 pts
Terrain44/100 · 44% evidence 10.9 / 25.0 pts
Scale54/100 · 100% evidence 9.8 / 18.2 pts
Lift system11/100 · 68% evidence 1.8 / 15.9 pts
Family & value81/100 · 41% evidence 11.0 / 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 useFamily trips · 52/100Snow reliabilityLowSki area30 km · 350 m verticalCurrent dataNo current updatePeer group<50 km · Top <2,000 m
Strengths
  • Mixed terrain match · 46/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence..
  • Mixed reliability match · 44/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence..
Consider

Snow resilience 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.

Scroll horizontally to compare resortsThe attribute column stays visible
AttributeChamonixChamonix ValleyGarmisch PartenkirchenGarmisch PartenkirchenFlaineLe Grand MassifBreuil CerviniaMatterhorn Ski ParadiseSaasSaastalFellhornWalmendingerhorn Ifen HeubergFlachauSnow Space SalzburgLa ColmianeLa Colmiane
Assessment
Decision score 75/10073/10065/10064/10064/10062/10059/10046/100
Structural Fit 82/100clear advantage73/10070/10075/10064/10062/10068/10046/100
Current opportunity 29/1000/10027/10022/1000/1000/1001/100–
Overall quality 6.0/106.5/104.2/109.2/10clear advantage8.7/106.8/106.0/10–
Recommendation confidence MediumMediumMediumMediumMediumMediumMediumLow
Ski-area profile
Historical snow reliability 68/10065/10069/10076/10078/10078/10070/10031/100
Typical daytime high 3°C1°C4°C-2°Cclear advantage1°C3°C4°C9°C
Typical snow/freezing level ––––––––
Typical overnight low -4°C-5°C-2°C-7°C-6°C-4°C-3°C-2°C
Rating 8.1/107.8/106.9/108.1/107.4/106.8/107.3/106.0/10
Area size class 150–250 km50–100 km250+ km250+ km100–150 km20–50 km100–150 km20–50 km
Ability profile advancedadvancedintermediateadvancedadvancednoviceadvancednovice
Price class highavghighhighhighavgavg–
Terrain and altitude
Marked pistes 175 km61 km265 km322 kmclear advantage142 km34 km120 km30 km
Lowest point 1,000 m730 m697 m1,562 m1,472 m1,070 m740 m1,450 m
Highest point 3,842 m2,650 m2,480 m3,899 m3,573 m1,946 m1,980 m1,800 m
Vertical range 2,842 mclear advantage1,920 m1,783 m2,337 m2,101 m876 m1,240 m350 m
Blue pistes 34%26%51%23%22%58%28%70%
Red pistes 44%56%36%68%62%35%68%20%
Black pistes 22%17%13%8%16%7%3%10%
Terrain above 2,000 m 55%0%24%92%clear advantage57%0%0%–
Terrain above 3,000 m 0%0%0%21%clear advantage0%0%0%–
Piste-mix diversity 97/10089/10089/10074/10084/10079/10067/10073/100
Slope-angle diversity 86/100clear advantage47/10050/10051/10068/10045/10034/100–
Very/extremely steep terrain 21%clear advantage2%5%6%2%1%1%–
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 above typical+321% vs average · 100th percentileWell below typical-40% vs average · 4th percentile––Well below typical-83% 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 cm–0 cm19 cm––0 cm–
Mid-mountain snow 99 cm–96 cm53 cm––3 cm–
Mountain snow 145 cm–160 cm75 cm––5 cm–
Fresh snow 0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm–
Snow quality –––9.6/10––––
Snow alert 0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm0 cm–
Open terrain and lifts
Open slopes –––7%––––
Open lifts ––––––––
Lift capacity per piste km 556 pph/km597 pph/km382 pph/km298 pph/km289 pph/km384 pph/km687 pph/kmclear advantage192 pph/km
Lift-system coverage 0.48×0.86×clear advantage0.22×0.28×0.28×0.26×0.40×0.13×
Terrain per lift 2.5 km/lift2.1 km/lift4.2 km/lift6.3 km/lift3.6 km/lift2.6 km/lift2.7 km/lift4.3 km/lift
Weather
Minimum temperature 4°C4°C2°C1°C1°C-2°C3°C–
Maximum temperature 11°C10°C8°C9°C6°C7°C7°C–
Suitability and facilities
Family suitability ––––family–family–
Piste variety slopes––slopesslopes–slopes–
Off-piste offpiste––offpiste––––
Cross-country ––––––crosscountry–
Lift network –lifts–liftslifts–lifts–
Mountain restaurants –––restaurantsrestaurants–restaurants–
Après-ski –––apresskiapresski–apresski–
Public transport transittransit–transit––transit–
Best airport transfer 63 min62 min73 min104 min441 min56 min67 min–
Skiing per transfer hour 166 km/h transfer59 km/h transfer218 km/h transferclear advantage186 km/h transfer19 km/h transfer36 km/h transfer107 km/h transfer–