Compare ski resorts

Recommendation

Decision summary

Les Deux Alpes is the strongest match because of good terrain match · 71/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale, exceptional reliability match · 90/100 — led by strong snow resilience. Obersaxen Mundaun is the strongest alternative.

Recommended

Les Deux Alpes

74/100

Why

Les Deux Alpes is the strongest match because of good terrain match · 71/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale, exceptional reliability match · 90/100 — led by strong snow resilience. Obersaxen Mundaun is the strongest alternative.

Mixed evidenceUpdated 19 h ago

Strong structural fit for the selected priorities (76/100).
Solid upper-mountain snow base at 340 cm.

AlternativeObersaxen Mundaun

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.

Detailed comparison reasoningEvidence bridge, trade-offs and decision boundaries

Recommended for this profile

Les Deux Alpes

Large-domain explorerLow-regret choice

Leads on good terrain match · 71/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale, exceptional reliability match · 90/100 — led by strong snow resilience.

Why Les Deux Alpes leads Obersaxen Mundaun Access +8.0 pts and Snow now +8.0 pts

Terrain fit -13.1Access +8.0Snow now +8.0Snow reliability +2.9

Incoming snow and Weather stay in the forecast layer unless current/forecast evidence is explicitly part of the Decision score.

Strongest alternativeObersaxen Mundaun

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

What could change the resultIncrease lift system weight from 14 to 34 and Obersaxen Mundaun becomes the leading option.

Lead margin6.0pts

Difference between the first and second option.

Ranking stabilityHigh100%

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

Evidence confidence75%

Coverage and coherence of evidence used by this comparison.

Advanced analysisSensitivity, Pareto trade-offs and score contributions

Pareto frontier1 option

1 option is 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.

Lift systemObersaxen Mundaun

Increase lift system weight from 14 to 34 and Obersaxen Mundaun becomes the leading option.

14 → 34

SnowObersaxen Mundaun

Reduce snow weight from 24 to 3 and Obersaxen Mundaun becomes the leading option.

24 → 3

Why Les Deux Alpes leads Obersaxen Mundaun · 6.0 pts

Access+8.0 pts

Current opportunity+8.0 pts

Lift system-6.9 pts

Snow+2.9 pts

Scale-2.6 pts

Family & value-2.2 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.

Les Deux Alpes

#1 · Les 2 Alpes · France

Decision74/100

Fit76/100

Now58/100

Quality9.5/10

Now58340 cm upperReliability9090/100Terrain7171/100Access7878 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.

Fit76.186% weight Now58.414% weight Decision73.7/100

Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow90/100 · 73% evidence 21.7 / 24.0 pts

Terrain75/100 · 80% evidence 16.6 / 22.0 pts

Scale90/100 · 100% evidence 14.3 / 16.0 pts

Lift system25/100 · 68% evidence 3.5 / 14.0 pts

Access78/100 · 68% evidence 9.3 / 12.0 pts

Family & value89/100 · 41% evidence 10.7 / 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 snow340 cm 42.9 / 42.9 pts

Fresh snow0 cm 0.0 / 22.9 pts

Valley snow40 cm 5.1 / 22.9 pts

Mid-mountain snow220 cm 10.5 / 11.4 pts

Open terrainNo data excluded

Snow qualityNo data excluded

Data coverage: 70%

Destination typeLarge-domain explorerBest useSnow-first trips · 80/100Snow reliabilityVery highSki area220 km · 2,243 m verticalTerrain >2,000 m63%Best transfer78 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group150–299 km · Top 2,800+ m

Strengths

Good terrain match · 71/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale..
Exceptional reliability match · 90/100 — led by strong snow resilience..

Consider

Lift-system evidence is less convincing.

Obersaxen Mundaun

#2 · Obersaxen Val Lumnezia Graubunden · Switzerland

Decision68/100

Fit68/100

Now0/100

Quality4.0/10

Now00 cm freshReliability5858/100Terrain7171/100

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.

Fit67.7100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision67.7/100

Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow58/100 · 73% evidence 15.8 / 27.3 pts

Terrain63/100 · 80% evidence 15.7 / 25.0 pts

Scale82/100 · 100% evidence 15.0 / 18.2 pts

Lift system62/100 · 8% evidence 9.9 / 15.9 pts

Family & value84/100 · 41% evidence 11.4 / 13.6 pts

AccessNo data excluded

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 typeLarge-domain explorerBest useFamily trips · 71/100Snow reliabilityModerateSki area120 km · 1,109 m verticalTerrain >2,000 m12%Current dataUpdated for selected datePeer group50–149 km · Top 2,000–2,799 m

Strengths

Good terrain match · 71/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence..
Solid reliability match · 58/100 — led by strong snow resilience..

Consider

Across the commonly available decision dimensions, Les 2 Alpes is at least as strong and meaningfully better on one or more dimensions.

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.

Find column

Scroll horizontally to compare resortsThe attribute column stays visible

Attribute	Les Deux AlpesLes 2 Alpes	Obersaxen MundaunObersaxen Val Lumnezia Graubunden
Assessment
Decision score	74/100clear advantage	68/100
Structural Fit	76/100clear advantage	68/100
Current opportunity	58/100clear advantage	0/100
Overall quality	9.5/10clear advantage	4.0/10
Recommendation confidence	Medium	Medium
Ski-area profile
Historical snow reliability	79/100clear advantage	58/100
Typical daytime high	0°C	2°C
Typical snow/freezing level	–	–
Typical overnight low	-6°C	-5°C
Rating	8.0/10clear advantage	7.7/10
Area size class	150–250 km	100–150 km
Ability profile	intermediate	intermediate
Price class	avg	high
Terrain and altitude
Marked pistes	220 kmclear advantage	120 km
Lowest point	1,280 m	1,201 m
Highest point	3,523 mclear advantage	2,310 m
Vertical range	2,243 mclear advantage	1,109 m
Blue pistes	65%	42%
Red pistes	18%	42%
Black pistes	17%	17%
Terrain above 2,000 m	63%clear advantage	12%
Terrain above 3,000 m	13%clear advantage	0%
Piste-mix diversity	81/100	94/100clear advantage
Slope-angle diversity	56/100clear advantage	23/100
Very/extremely steep terrain	5%	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	–	–
Valley snow versus typical	–	–
Open slopes versus typical	–	–
Current snow
Valley snow	40 cm	–
Mid-mountain snow	220 cm	–
Mountain snow	340 cm	–
Fresh snow	0 cm	0 cm
Snow quality	–	–
Snow alert	0 cm	0 cm
Open terrain and lifts
Open slopes	–	–
Open lifts	–	–
Lift capacity per piste km	316 pph/km	–
Lift-system coverage	0.18×	–
Terrain per lift	5.5 km/lift	8.0 km/lift
Weather
Minimum temperature	8°C	8°C
Maximum temperature	11°C	13°C
Suitability and facilities
Family suitability	family	–
Piste variety	slopes	–
Off-piste	–	–
Cross-country	–	–
Lift network	lifts	–
Mountain restaurants	restaurants	–
Après-ski	apresski	–
Public transport	transit	–
Best airport transfer	78 min	–
Skiing per transfer hour	169 km/h transfer	–

Shape the comparison

Start a comparison

Decision summary

Les Deux Alpes

Les Deux Alpes

Resort overview

Les Deux Alpes

Obersaxen Mundaun

Detailed comparison