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

Bad Ragaz is the strongest match because of good terrain match · 71/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale, solid reliability match · 58/100 — led by strong snow resilience. Braunwald is the strongest alternative. 1 option have limited evidence coverage.

Balanced profileSummer / glacier
Recommended

Bad Ragaz

69/100
Why
  1. Bad Ragaz is the strongest match because of good terrain match · 71/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale, solid reliability match · 58/100 — led by strong snow resilience. Braunwald is the strongest alternative. 1 option have limited evidence coverage.
Limited evidenceUpdated 17 h ago
  • Structural fit score: 69/100.

Evidence coverage is limited; the ranking may move with new observations.

AlternativeBraunwald
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.
Limited evidenceUpdated 17 h ago8.6 pts lead
Next
Open webcamsShow on mapInspect forecast
Detailed comparison reasoningEvidence bridge, trade-offs and decision boundaries
Recommended for this profile

Bad Ragaz

Large-domain explorerLow-regret choice

Leads on good terrain match · 71/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale, solid reliability match · 58/100 — led by strong snow resilience.

Why Bad Ragaz leads Braunwald Terrain fit +4.3 pts and Access +2.7 pts
Terrain fit +4.3Access +2.7Snow reliability +1.7
Incoming snow and Weather stay in the forecast layer unless current/forecast evidence is explicitly part of the Decision score.

Strongest alternativeBraunwald

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

What could change the resultIncrease lift system weight from 14 to 53 and Braunwald becomes the leading option.

Lead margin8.6pts

Difference between the first and second option.

Ranking stabilityHigh100%

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

Evidence confidence77%

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 systemBraunwald

Increase lift system weight from 14 to 53 and Braunwald becomes the leading option.

14 → 53
Why Bad Ragaz leads Braunwald · 8.6 pts
Scale+3.5 pts
Lift system-3.2 pts
Access+2.7 pts
Family & value+2.6 pts
Snow+1.7 pts
Terrain+1.4 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.

Bad Ragaz

#1 · Pizol Bad Ragaz Wangs · Switzerland

Decision69/100
Fit69/100
Now0/100
Quality6.2/10
Now00 cm freshReliability5858/100Terrain7171/100Access8267 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.

Fit69.4100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision69.4/100
Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow58/100 · 73% evidence 13.9 / 24.0 pts
Terrain71/100 · 80% evidence 15.6 / 22.0 pts
Scale87/100 · 100% evidence 13.9 / 16.0 pts
Lift system48/100 · 68% evidence 6.8 / 14.0 pts
Access82/100 · 68% evidence 9.8 / 12.0 pts
Family & value79/100 · 41% evidence 9.5 / 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.

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 reliabilityHighSki area44 km · 1,718 m verticalTerrain >2,000 m26%Best transfer67 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group<50 km · Top 2,000–2,799 m
Strengths
  • Good terrain match · 71/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale..
  • Solid reliability match · 58/100 — led by strong snow resilience..
Consider

Lift-system evidence is less convincing.

Braunwald

#2 · Braunwald · Switzerland

Decision61/100
Fit61/100
Now0/100
Quality8.2/10
Now00 cm freshReliability5151/100Terrain6565/100Access6096 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.

Fit60.8100% weight Now0.00% weight Decision60.8/100
Structural Fit calculation

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

Snow51/100 · 73% evidence 12.2 / 24.0 pts
Terrain64/100 · 80% evidence 14.2 / 22.0 pts
Scale65/100 · 100% evidence 10.4 / 16.0 pts
Lift system71/100 · 8% evidence 10.0 / 14.0 pts
Access60/100 · 68% evidence 7.1 / 12.0 pts
Family & value58/100 · 41% evidence 6.9 / 12.0 pts

Data coverage: 65%

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 useAdvanced skiing · 62/100Snow reliabilityModerateSki area26 km · 665 m verticalTerrain >2,000 m2%Best transfer96 minCurrent dataUpdated for selected datePeer group<50 km · Top <2,000 m
Strengths
  • Good terrain match · 65/100 — led by strong terrain profile and substantial ski-area scale; partial evidence..
  • Mixed reliability match · 51/100 — led by strong snow resilience..
Consider

Across the commonly available decision dimensions, Pizol Bad Ragaz Wangs is at least as strong and meaningfully better on one or more dimensions.

Chuebodensee

#3 · · 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
AttributeBad RagazPizol Bad Ragaz WangsBraunwaldBraunwaldChuebodenseeSwitzerland
Assessment
Decision score 69/100clear advantage61/100–
Structural Fit 69/100clear advantage61/100–
Current opportunity 0/1000/100–
Overall quality 6.2/108.2/10clear advantage–
Recommendation confidence MediumMediumLow
Ski-area profile
Historical snow reliability 62/10057/100–
Typical daytime high 3°C2°C–
Typical snow/freezing level –––
Typical overnight low -4°C-4°C–
Rating 5.9/106.3/10clear advantage–
Area size class 20–50 km20–50 km–
Ability profile intermediateadvanced–
Price class highhigh–
Terrain and altitude
Marked pistes 44 km26 km–
Lowest point 509 m1,236 mclear advantage–
Highest point 2,227 mclear advantage1,901 m–
Vertical range 1,718 mclear advantage665 m–
Blue pistes 43%23%–
Red pistes 42%69%–
Black pistes 15%clear advantage8%–
Terrain above 2,000 m 26%clear advantage2%–
Terrain above 3,000 m 0%0%–
Piste-mix diversity 92/100clear advantage72/100–
Slope-angle diversity 40/10053/100clear advantage–
Very/extremely steep terrain 5%7%–
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 –––
Mid-mountain snow –––
Mountain snow –––
Fresh snow 0 cm0 cm–
Snow quality –––
Snow alert 0 cm0 cm0 cm
Open terrain and lifts
Open slopes –––
Open lifts –––
Lift capacity per piste km 411 pph/km––
Lift-system coverage 0.36×––
Terrain per lift 3.6 km/lift2.6 km/lift–
Weather
Minimum temperature 12°C8°C4°C
Maximum temperature 21°C13°C11°C
Suitability and facilities
Family suitability –––
Piste variety –––
Off-piste –––
Cross-country –––
Lift network –––
Mountain restaurants –––
Après-ski –––
Public transport transit––
Best airport transfer 67 minclear advantage96 min–
Skiing per transfer hour 39 km/h transfer16 km/h transfer–