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.

Selected3 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.

3 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

Montgenevre is the strongest match because of good terrain match · 67/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale, good reliability match · 70/100 — led by strong snow resilience. Risoul is the strongest alternative. 3 options remain on the Pareto frontier.

Balanced profileSummer / glacier
Recommended

Montgenevre

69/100
Why
  1. Montgenevre is the strongest match because of good terrain match · 67/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale, good reliability match · 70/100 — led by strong snow resilience. Risoul is the strongest alternative. 3 options remain on the Pareto frontier.
Mixed evidenceUpdated 17 h ago
  • Solid upper-mountain snow base at 260 cm.
AlternativeRisoul
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.
Mixed evidenceUpdated 17 h ago6.3 pts lead
Next
Open webcamsShow on mapInspect forecast
Detailed comparison reasoningEvidence bridge, trade-offs and decision boundaries
Recommended for this profile

Montgenevre

Large-domain explorerLow-regret choice

Leads on good terrain match · 67/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale, good reliability match · 70/100 — led by strong snow resilience.

Why Montgenevre leads Risoul Snow now +9.7 pts and Access +3.7 pts
Snow now +9.7Terrain fit -4.3Access +3.7Snow reliability -2.9
Incoming snow and Weather stay in the forecast layer unless current/forecast evidence is explicitly part of the Decision score.

Strongest alternativeRisoul

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

What could change the resultIncrease family & value weight from 12 to 53 and Risoul becomes the leading option.

Lead margin6.3pts

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 frontier3 options

No selected option is clearly dominated on the shared evidence.

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.

Family & valueRisoul

Increase family & value weight from 12 to 53 and Risoul becomes the leading option.

12 → 53
Why Montgenevre leads Risoul · 6.3 pts
Current opportunity+9.7 pts
Access+3.7 pts
Family & value-3.0 pts
Snow-2.9 pts
Terrain-0.8 pts
Scale-0.3 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.

Montgenevre

#1 · La Voie Lactee · France

Decision69/100
Fit69/100
Now71/100
Quality9.0/10
Now71260 cm upperReliability7070/100Terrain6767/100Access7582 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.

Fit68.886% weight Now71.414% weight Decision69.2/100
Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow70/100 · 73% evidence 16.9 / 24.0 pts
Terrain75/100 · 80% evidence 16.4 / 22.0 pts
Scale96/100 · 85% evidence 15.3 / 16.0 pts
Lift system24/100 · 68% evidence 3.4 / 14.0 pts
Access75/100 · 68% evidence 9.0 / 12.0 pts
Family & value65/100 · 41% evidence 7.8 / 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 snow260 cm 37.1 / 42.9 pts
Fresh snow0 cm 0.0 / 22.9 pts
Valley snow240 cm 22.9 / 22.9 pts
Mid-mountain snow252 cm 11.4 / 11.4 pts
Open terrainNo data excluded
Snow qualityNo data excluded

Data coverage: 70%

Destination typeLarge-domain explorerBest useAdvanced skiing · 71/100Snow reliabilityHighSki area400 km · 1,251 m verticalTerrain >2,000 m65%Best transfer82 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group300+ km · Top 2,000–2,799 m
Strengths
  • Good terrain match · 67/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale..
  • Good reliability match · 70/100 — led by strong snow resilience..
Consider

Lift-system evidence is less convincing.

Risoul

#2 · La Foret Blanche · France

Decision63/100
Fit63/100
Now0/100
Quality7.4/10
Now00 cm freshReliability7373/100Terrain6565/100Access34148 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.

Fit62.9100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision62.9/100
Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow73/100 · 73% evidence 17.5 / 24.0 pts
Terrain68/100 · 80% evidence 15.0 / 22.0 pts
Scale84/100 · 100% evidence 13.5 / 16.0 pts
Lift system22/100 · 68% evidence 3.1 / 14.0 pts
Access34/100 · 68% evidence 4.1 / 12.0 pts
Family & value81/100 · 41% evidence 9.7 / 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.

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 useSnow-first trips · 66/100Snow reliabilityVery highSki area185 km · 1,100 m verticalTerrain >2,000 m82%Best transfer148 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group150–299 km · Top 2,000–2,799 m
Strengths
  • Good terrain match · 65/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale..
  • Good reliability match · 73/100 — led by strong snow resilience..
Consider

Lift-system evidence is less convincing.

Orcieres Merlette

#3 · Orcieres Merlette · France

Decision61/100
Fit61/100
Now0/100
Quality6.2/10
Now00 cm freshReliability7474/100Terrain5959/100Access50120 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.

Fit61.3100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision61.3/100
Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow74/100 · 73% evidence 17.8 / 24.0 pts
Terrain65/100 · 80% evidence 14.2 / 22.0 pts
Scale77/100 · 100% evidence 12.4 / 16.0 pts
Lift system30/100 · 68% evidence 4.2 / 14.0 pts
Access50/100 · 68% evidence 6.0 / 12.0 pts
Family & value56/100 · 41% evidence 6.7 / 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.

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 · 65/100Snow reliabilityVery highSki area100 km · 875 m verticalTerrain >2,000 m92%Best transfer120 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group50–149 km · Top 2,000–2,799 m
Strengths
  • Solid terrain match · 59/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale..
  • Good reliability match · 74/100 — led by strong snow resilience..
Consider

Lift-system evidence is less convincing.

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
AttributeMontgenevreLa Voie LacteeRisoulLa Foret BlancheOrcieres MerletteOrcieres Merlette
Assessment
Decision score 69/100clear advantage63/10061/100
Structural Fit 69/100clear advantage63/10061/100
Current opportunity 71/100clear advantage0/1000/100
Overall quality 9.0/10clear advantage7.4/106.2/10
Recommendation confidence MediumMediumMedium
Ski-area profile
Historical snow reliability 65/10072/10072/100
Typical daytime high 0°C3°C1°C
Typical snow/freezing level –––
Typical overnight low -7°C-5°C-5°C
Rating 6.8/107.6/10clear advantage6.8/10
Area size class 250+ km150–250 km50–100 km
Ability profile advancedadvancedadvanced
Price class lowlowlow
Terrain and altitude
Marked pistes 400 kmclear advantage185 km100 km
Lowest point 1,538 m1,650 m1,850 mclear advantage
Highest point 2,789 m2,750 m2,725 m
Vertical range 1,251 mclear advantage1,100 m875 m
Blue pistes 24%41%18%
Red pistes 55%49%68%
Black pistes 21%clear advantage11%14%
Terrain above 2,000 m 65%82%92%clear advantage
Terrain above 3,000 m 0%0%0%
Piste-mix diversity 91/10087/10077/100
Slope-angle diversity 37/10043/10048/100
Very/extremely steep terrain 3%4%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 –––
Valley snow versus typical –––
Open slopes versus typical –––
Current snow
Valley snow 240 cm––
Mid-mountain snow 252 cm––
Mountain snow 260 cm––
Fresh snow 0 cm0 cm0 cm
Snow quality –––
Snow alert 0 cm0 cm0 cm
Open terrain and lifts
Open slopes –––
Open lifts –––
Lift capacity per piste km 254 pph/km284 pph/km315 pph/km
Lift-system coverage 0.19×0.22×0.18×
Terrain per lift 5.8 km/lift5.4 km/lift3.6 km/lift
Weather
Minimum temperature 6°C8°C8°C
Maximum temperature 15°C16°C16°C
Suitability and facilities
Family suitability family–family
Piste variety slopes–slopes
Off-piste offpiste––
Cross-country –––
Lift network –––
Mountain restaurants –––
Après-ski –––
Public transport transit––
Best airport transfer 82 minclear advantage148 min120 min
Skiing per transfer hour 293 km/h transferclear advantage75 km/h transfer50 km/h transfer