Downhill and cross-country skiing: how many calories do you burn?

It is 4:30 p.m., the lifts are closing and your watch shows an impressive number for the day. Is it believable? To find out, start from the reference researchers use: the Compendium of Physical Activities, updated in 2024. It gives every activity a MET value, a multiple of the energy you use at rest. The math fits on one line: kcal ≈ MET × body weight (kg) × duration (h). One hour of downhill skiing at a moderate effort (6.3 METs) at 70 kg therefore comes to 440 kcal.

One detail matters a lot: for downhill skiing and snowboarding, the Compendium specifies “active time only”. These values describe the minutes you spend sliding, not the minutes you spend waiting at the bottom of the chairlift. In cross-country skiing, by contrast, you keep moving almost without breaks, and speed makes the difference: 6.8 METs when ski walking at about 4 km/h, 11.3 METs between 8 and 12.7 km/h, and 14 to 16 METs for elite racers.

The table below applies the formula to the main ways of skiing, from 55 to 100 kg. At the same pace, a 100 kg person burns almost twice as much as a 55 kg person, because there is more mass to move. Find your row, and keep in mind that snow conditions, terrain and technique can shift the result either way.

The question that matters is not “how much does an hour of downhill burn”, but “how much does my day burn”. Between the lift line, the chairlift, the stops to regroup the family and the hot chocolate at 11, the time you actually spend sliding is much shorter than it feels.

A team from the University of Salzburg measured it on the slopes (Stöggl et al., 2016). Nineteen adults with an average age of 48, fitted with a portable gas analyzer and GPS, skied behind an instructor: each run of about 7 minutes was followed by nearly 9 minutes in the line and on the chairlift. Active skiing made up only 44% of the total time. The authors cite another study in which recovery periods, including lifts and short breaks, reached up to 67% of the time. The result: their skiers burned an average of 584 kcal per hour of skiing, but 279 kcal per hour once lift time was counted.

To estimate a full day, Ember uses that ratio: 44% of the time skiing, at the Compendium value, and 56% in the line or on the chairlift, counted as “standing quietly” (1.3 METs, code 07040). Over 5 hours on the slopes, lunch excluded, that is about 2 hours and 10 minutes of real skiing. At 70 kg and a moderate pace, it comes to 245 kcal per hour at the resort, very close to the 3.4 kcal per kilo per hour measured in Salzburg.

In cross-country skiing, you are the chairlift. Every meter is earned with your legs and arms, and your whole body works without the breaks a slope gives a downhill skier. The measurements agree: in the Salzburg study, the same participants burned 729 kcal per hour of classic cross-country skiing, against 584 kcal while skiing downhill and only 279 kcal per hour of downhill once lift time was counted. The authors conclude that it takes at least two and a half hours of downhill skiing, lines and lifts included, to match the energy cost of one hour of cross-country.

A more recent study, carried out in China on young skiers with a portable analyzer, points the same way (Li et al., 2026). On an intermediate run, downhill skiing measured during the descent reached 7.8 METs and snowboarding 7.4 METs, which is vigorous intensity. On a treadmill, on roller skis between 13.5 and 21 km/h, classic style reached 8.6 METs and skating 10.6 METs. These young skiers went above the Compendium’s “moderate” value on the way down, but cross-country still came out ahead.

In practice, a 2-hour cross-country outing at a moderate pace (6.4 to 7.9 km/h) burns about 1,190 kcal at 70 kg, almost as much as a full day of downhill skiing at a moderate pace. If you want the snow sport that burns the most for the time you spend outside, this is it.

Not every way of sliding on snow costs the same. Three cases come up often, and their numbers deserve a word of explanation.

It is a popular idea: you would burn extra calories just because it is −10 °C outside. The reality is more nuanced, and no reliable number lets you add a “cold bonus” to your ski day.

The American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM), in its 2021 expert consensus statement on cold-weather exercise, notes that physical activity sharply increases heat production compared with rest. As long as you keep moving and are dressed properly, your body warms itself mainly through the effort itself. The statement does point out that heavy clothing, equipment and resistance to movement can raise the energy cost of exercise, and that cold can change how you move and walk. It gives no percentage.

The risk of getting cold appears mainly when you can no longer move: after a fall, an injury or real exhaustion. Ember therefore does not inflate the numbers in this article for the cold. The ACSM’s practical advice lies elsewhere: keep your carbohydrate stores topped up and keep track of what you drink, even when it is freezing.

Ski trips have their rituals: tartiflette, the Savoyard bake of potatoes, Reblochon cheese and bacon, at the mountain restaurant, and raclette in the chalet at night. These dishes are generous, and it is tempting to think the day on the slopes has “paid” for them. Let us compare the numbers using net expenditure, meaning what skiing adds on top of an ordinary day.

A homemade portion of tartiflette (a quarter of a classic recipe with a whole Reblochon) is about 880 kcal, and a typical raclette evening about 1,450 kcal per person, according to the breakdown in our raclette calories guide. A moderate day of downhill skiing at 70 kg adds about 875 kcal: it covers the tartiflette at lunch, not the raclette at dinner on top. Two hours of cross-country skiing, at about 1,050 net kcal, leave a little more room.

Your watch or phone often has a “ski” mode that separates runs from lift rides, which is already an improvement. The calorie estimate is still imprecise: in a Stanford study of seven wrist-worn devices, none had an error below 20% on energy expenditure, and the median error ranged from 27 to 93% depending on the model. We go through these limits in our article on Apple Watch calories.

For an honest estimate, work in three steps. First, count your real skiing time rather than your time at the resort: without a measurement, assume about 44% of your time on the slopes is spent going down. Then pick the table row that matches your effort and multiply. Finally, log your meals through the day, including the mulled wine and the afternoon crêpe, which add up quickly.

With Ember, you can snap a photo of the tartiflette or type “raclette, 200 g cheese, 3 potatoes, cured meats” to get an estimate of calories and macros. By the end of your ski week, you can see whether your meals kept pace with your days on the snow or went well beyond them.