Compare Polar Destinations

The two most popular aurora destinations — Iceland's volcanic landscapes versus Norway's Arctic coast. Which is right for you?

→ Norway wins on aurora reliability; Iceland wins on accessibility from USA and unique landscape diversity.

Two of Europe's top aurora destinations compared — Iceland's dramatic volcanic landscapes against Finland's serene Lapland wilderness and glass igloos.

→ Finland offers higher aurora success rates thanks to clearer skies in Lapland.

Comparing Scandinavia's two aurora powerhouses — Norway's fjord-side displays versus Finland's forest-backed lights and unique accommodation.

→ Norway (especially Tromsø) has a slight edge in aurora score and coastal scenery.

Iceland's accessible aurora scene compared to Sweden's Abisko — statistically one of the best aurora viewing spots on Earth.

→ Abisko has the highest clear-sky success rate in Scandinavia thanks to its unique microclimate.

North America's aurora capital Fairbanks versus Europe's most popular aurora destination. Two very different experiences.

→ Fairbanks has better aurora statistics (higher latitude, more clear nights) but Iceland is easier to reach from Europe and offers more diverse daytime activities.

The top aurora destinations on each side of the Atlantic — Fairbanks' dark interior skies versus Tromsø's fjord-side magic.

→ Both score 9/10 for aurora.

Tromsø's coastal aurora experience compared to Abisko's legendary clear skies — two Scandinavian neighbours, two very different vibes.

→ Abisko has statistically more clear nights.

Finnish Lapland's family-friendly aurora capital versus Swedish Lapland's adventure hub near the ICEHOTEL and Abisko.

→ Rovaniemi is more family-oriented (Santa Claus Village, glass igloos).

Yellowknife's aurora oval location versus Iceland's volcanic aurora playground — North America vs Europe's best.

→ Yellowknife sits directly under the auroral oval with exceptional clear-sky rates.

Two of North America's finest aurora destinations — Yellowknife sits directly under the auroral oval in Canada's Northwest Territories, while Fairbanks commands Alaska's vast dark interior. Both exceed 60°N latitude with exceptional clear-sky access and world-class viewing infrastructure.

→ Yellowknife sits marginally closer to the auroral oval with slightly better statistics, but Fairbanks wins on Chena Hot Springs access and flight connections from Japan and the US West Coast.

Norway's Arctic capital versus Finland's Santa Claus hometown — both iconic aurora destinations but very different in character.

→ Tromsø wins for aurora reliability and activities; Rovaniemi wins for unique atmosphere and glass igloos.

Norway's most popular aurora city versus Sweden's scientifically proven clearest-sky location. A classic debate among aurora chasers.

→ Abisko wins on clear sky statistics; Tromsø wins on activities, accommodation choice, and overall experience.

North America's two premier aurora destinations — Canada's Aurora Capital versus Alaska's interior powerhouse.

→ Both are excellent; Yellowknife wins slightly on aurora statistics, Fairbanks wins on hot springs and Japanese visitor infrastructure.

The ultimate Arctic upgrade — is Svalbard worth the extra cost and effort versus the more accessible Tromsø?

→ Svalbard wins on aurora intensity and Arctic wilderness; Tromsø wins on value, activities, and overall accessibility.

Finland's two most popular Lapland destinations — the Arctic Circle city with Santa Claus versus the premier ski resort.

→ Rovaniemi wins for glass igloos and family Christmas magic; Levi wins for skiers and winter sports enthusiasts.

Is it worth crossing the Drake Passage to reach Antarctica, or is Ushuaia alone enough of an adventure?

→ If budget allows, Antarctica is a transformative experience impossible to replicate elsewhere; Ushuaia is a destination in itself for Patagonia lovers.

Sweden's Arctic hub city versus the world's clearest aurora viewing location — both in Swedish Lapland, just 90 minutes apart.

→ Abisko wins on aurora purity; Kiruna wins as a base with airport access, the Icehotel, and broader infrastructure.

Alta claims 'Aurora Capital of Norway' status while Tromsø gets the tourist footfall — which delivers the better experience?

→ Alta wins on clear skies and aurora statistics; Tromsø wins on infrastructure, activities, and overall travel experience.

Norway's most photogenic islands versus the Arctic capital — which is better for northern lights photography?

→ Lofoten wins for aurora photography and dramatic landscapes; Tromsø wins for aurora reliability and activities breadth.

Iceland's most dramatic volcanic region versus the accessible capital — which gives the better aurora experience in Iceland?

→ Mývatn wins on aurora reliability (inland, less cloud), geothermal bathing, and volcanic drama; Reykjavik wins on accessibility, city life, and international connections.

The wilder, quieter Lyngen Alps versus Norway's aurora capital — both at the same latitude, very different in character.

→ Lyngen wins for mountain scenery, powder skiing, and wilderness photography; Tromsø wins for activities breadth, whale watching, and urban comforts.

Britain's two northernmost island groups — both offer aurora, wildlife, and dramatic scenery, but with very different characters.

→ Shetland wins on aurora frequency and Norse character; Orkney wins on Neolithic monuments and easier access.

Two of the Arctic's most spectacular destinations — Greenland's icefjord city versus Norway's polar wilderness archipelago.

→ Both are bucket-list Arctic experiences; Ilulissat wins for icebergs and aurora photography; Svalbard wins for polar bears, glaciers, and expedition feel.

Canada's most famous mountain destination versus its Aurora Capital — very different aurora probabilities, very different experiences.

→ Yellowknife wins decisively on aurora reliability (aurora score 9 vs 4); Banff wins on skiing, mountain scenery, and overall tourism infrastructure.

Two Yukon aurora destinations — the historic Gold Rush town versus the Yukon capital. Both offer outstanding aurora but very different town character.

→ Dawson City wins on character, history, and quirky atmosphere; Whitehorse wins on accessibility, tour operator choice, and accommodation range.

The world's two best clear-sky aurora locations — Greenland's ice cap gateway versus Sweden's microclimate marvel. Both claim the world's clearest aurora skies.

→ Both are statistically exceptional; Kangerlussuaq wins on remoteness and ice cap access; Abisko wins on infrastructure, activities, and overall value.

Finland's aurora capital on the Arctic Circle versus the remote Sámi heartland 300km further north.

→ Inari has significantly better aurora viewing — darker skies, higher latitude, less light pollution.

The two most popular city-based aurora destinations in the world. Which delivers better?

→ Tromsø has the higher aurora score (9 vs 7) and darker skies.

Alaska's interior aurora capital versus its biggest city — a 6-hour drive apart but worlds away in aurora viewing.

→ Fairbanks wins decisively for aurora (score 9 vs 6).

Iceland's capital versus its charming northern second city — Akureyri sits much further north with darker skies and far less urban light pollution. Both are excellent bases for Iceland's aurora season, but they offer very different experiences of the country.

→ Akureyri wins on aurora probability thanks to its northern location and darker surroundings; Reykjavik wins on international flight connections and big-city amenities.

Canada's two top aurora cities — Yellowknife in the Northwest Territories and Whitehorse in the Yukon — both sit in the auroral zone with a thriving winter tourism scene. They're frequently compared by travellers planning a Canadian aurora trip.

→ Yellowknife has a slight statistical edge on aurora success rates sitting directly on the oval; Whitehorse offers more diverse winter activities and a scenic mountain setting.

Finland's Arctic Circle capital versus the quieter fell resort 250km further north — Saariselkä sits noticeably higher above the Arctic Circle with darker, clearer skies. Both lie in Finnish Lapland but offer very different visitor experiences.

→ Saariselkä wins on darker skies and aurora probability due to its higher latitude; Rovaniemi wins on infrastructure, glass igloos, Santa Claus Village, and international flight connections.

The two southernmost cities in the world, both gateway towns to Antarctica and the aurora australis. Ushuaia is Argentina's dramatic Patagonian port, while Punta Arenas is Chile's Strait of Magellan gateway — rival cities with much in common but distinct national characters.

→ Ushuaia edges ahead on southern lights tourism infrastructure and its dramatic location at the End of the World; Punta Arenas wins on wider Patagonia connections and slightly better transport links.

Two of Finnish Lapland's most remote and rewarding destinations — Inari is the Sámi cultural heartland beside the vast lake of the same name, while Saariselkä is a modern ski resort just 30km to the south. Both offer outstanding aurora experiences in Finland's deep north.

→ Both are excellent aurora spots; Inari wins on cultural authenticity and darker skies, Saariselkä wins on winter sports facilities and accommodation variety.

Norway's iconic island archipelago versus Sweden's scientifically proven clearest-sky aurora location — both are legendary among aurora chasers but for very different reasons. Lofoten offers jaw-dropping mountain-and-fjord backdrops; Abisko offers maximum statistical viewing success.

→ Abisko wins on clear-sky statistics and viewing probability; Lofoten wins on dramatic scenery and photography potential — choose Abisko for maximum sightings, Lofoten for the most beautiful aurora images.

Two of Canada's aurora capitals with very different personalities — Churchill on Hudson Bay is equally famous for polar bears, while Yellowknife is the dedicated Aurora Capital of Canada with purpose-built viewing infrastructure. Both sit on the auroral oval.

→ Yellowknife wins on aurora infrastructure and dedicated viewing experiences; Churchill wins as a unique dual-purpose destination combining polar bears with northern lights in one Arctic adventure.

Europe's most popular aurora city versus North America's aurora capital — two very different destinations that frequently appear in the same search. Reykjavik is easily accessible from both sides of the Atlantic; Fairbanks is America's premier dedicated northern lights base.

→ Fairbanks wins on aurora reliability and sky darkness; Reykjavik wins on accessibility from Europe and daytime activities — choose based on which continent you're flying from.

Finnish Lapland's iconic Arctic Circle capital versus Swedish Lapland's mining city and ICEHOTEL gateway — both are popular Scandinavian winter breaks with excellent aurora viewing. Rovaniemi sits right on the Arctic Circle while Kiruna is 145km further north.

→ Kiruna wins on aurora reliability due to its higher latitude and proximity to Abisko; Rovaniemi wins on tourism infrastructure, Santa Claus Village, and international name recognition.

New Zealand's adventure capital versus its southernmost inhabited island — Stewart Island is far better positioned for aurora australis viewing but Queenstown is vastly more accessible and developed. This is the quintessential New Zealand southern lights dilemma.

→ Stewart Island wins hands-down on aurora australis probability with its southern latitude and minimal light pollution; Queenstown wins on accessibility, accommodation range, and breadth of activities.

Tasmania's capital versus New Zealand's adventure hub — both are accessible Southern Hemisphere cities in the aurora australis zone. Hobart sits at 43°S and Queenstown at 45°S, putting both within range during strong geomagnetic events.

→ Both see aurora australis during strong events; Hobart wins on city amenities and the exceptional Tasmanian food and arts scene; Queenstown wins on adventure activities and a more established aurora touring scene.

A rising star in Norway's aurora scene versus its undisputed capital — Narvik offers exceptional powder skiing alongside Arctic lights, sitting at a similar latitude to Tromsø but with a very different mountain character. Both are well above the Arctic Circle.

→ Tromsø wins on aurora infrastructure, activities, and overall experience; Narvik wins for dedicated skiers who want powder slopes and northern lights combined without the crowds.

One of Europe's northernmost towns versus Norway's Arctic capital — Hammerfest at 70°N sits at an extreme northern latitude in Finnmark with long Polar Nights. Both offer genuine High Arctic experiences, but with very different visitor infrastructure.

→ Tromsø wins on activities, accommodation variety, and overall visitor experience; Hammerfest wins for those seeking the most extreme northerly bragging rights with fewer tourists.

The tiny village home of the original ICEHOTEL versus Swedish Lapland's main Arctic hub city — just 17km apart on the banks of the Torne River. Jukkasjärvi is pure immersive experience; Kiruna is the practical base with airport and infrastructure.

→ Jukkasjärvi wins as a transformative experience with its ICEHOTEL and riverside aurora setting; Kiruna wins as a functional base with airport access, rail connections, and more accommodation choice.

Russia's Arctic port city versus Norway's aurora capital — both sit well above the Arctic Circle at similar latitudes with strong aurora potential. Travel restrictions have made Murmansk far less accessible to most Western visitors in recent years.

→ Tromsø is the clear choice for international visitors due to easy access and world-class infrastructure; Murmansk appeals to those specifically seeking Russia's unique Arctic industrial and Soviet heritage.

The symbolic North Cape — mainland Europe's northernmost accessible point at 71°N — versus Norway's aurora hub. Nordkapp sits at an extreme latitude making it one of Europe's most northerly aurora viewing locations, but visitor infrastructure is limited and seasonal.

→ Tromsø wins comprehensively on visitor experience and infrastructure; Nordkapp offers a unique pilgrimage quality for those chasing extreme latitude and Arctic symbolism.

Iceland's whale watching capital in the north versus the capital city — Húsavík sits much further north with darker skies and better aurora probability while also offering the country's best whale watching. Reykjavik is the easy, internationally connected option.

→ Húsavík wins on aurora probability and the unique combination with world-class whale watching; Reykjavik wins on accessibility and daytime activities variety.

Alaska's iconic national park wilderness versus the state's interior aurora capital — both lie in Alaska's aurora zone but offer radically different experiences. Fairbanks is a proper city with dedicated aurora lodges; Denali is pure wilderness with aurora as a magnificent backdrop.

→ Fairbanks wins on dedicated aurora infrastructure and consistent success rates; Denali wins for those who want to combine Alaska's greatest wilderness with northern lights viewing.

Two Sub-Antarctic island groups forming part of every great Southern Ocean expedition — South Georgia for wildlife spectacle and Shackleton's grave, the Falklands for accessible penguin colonies and British culture at the world's end. Both are extraordinary wildlife destinations.

→ South Georgia wins for sheer wildlife spectacle and raw adventure; Falklands wins for easier independent access and a comfortable English-speaking gateway to sub-Antarctic exploration.

Manitoba's polar bear town versus Yukon's capital — both are famous Canadian aurora destinations but couldn't be more different in character. Churchill is the more remote and specialist destination reached by rail or air; Whitehorse is a proper small city with road and air access.

→ Whitehorse wins on overall tourism infrastructure and aurora tour range; Churchill wins as a bucket-list dual-purpose destination uniquely combining polar bear watching with northern lights.

Kemi's SnowCastle and Arctic icebreaker experience versus Rovaniemi's Santa Claus Village and glass igloos — two very different Finnish Lapland winter experiences often compared by travellers. Kemi sits on the Gulf of Bothnia coast while Rovaniemi is the Lapland capital 100km north.

→ Rovaniemi wins on aurora probability and overall winter holiday infrastructure; Kemi wins for the unique SnowCastle architecture and Arctic icebreaker cruise experiences.

Norway's secret island versus its world-famous neighbour — Senja offers landscapes many argue are even more dramatic than Lofoten, with a fraction of the visitors. Both sit well above the Arctic Circle with excellent aurora odds and spectacular coastal scenery.

→ Lofoten wins on infrastructure, accessibility, and international reputation; Senja wins for those seeking the same Arctic magic with significantly fewer crowds and a more authentic experience.

Norway's 2024 European Capital of Culture versus the Arctic's most famous city — Bodø sits just north of the Arctic Circle at 67°N while Tromsø is further at 70°N. Both serve as major gateways to the Lofoten Islands and offer genuine Arctic experiences.

→ Tromsø wins decisively on aurora reliability and dedicated infrastructure; Bodø wins as a growing cultural destination with lower prices and easy Lofoten ferry connections.

Finnish Lapland's quiet fell village 300km north of Rovaniemi versus the Arctic Circle capital — Muonio is home to Harriniva Holiday Centre and sits at a higher latitude with naturally darker skies. Both are excellent Finnish Lapland winter destinations for aurora seekers.

→ Muonio wins on darker skies and more wilderness-focused aurora experiences; Rovaniemi wins on city infrastructure, Santa Claus Village, flight connections, and accommodation range.

Nunavut's capital versus the Northwest Territories' aurora hub — Iqaluit at 63°N sits right in the auroral oval and is Canada's fastest-growing Arctic city, while Yellowknife has decades of dedicated aurora tourism infrastructure. Both are extraordinary High Arctic destinations.

→ Yellowknife wins on aurora tourism infrastructure with more operators and better-established viewing experiences; Iqaluit wins for the most remote and authentic Inuit Arctic community immersion.

Norway's easternmost point — a tiny island fortress town at 70°N in Finnmark — versus the Arctic's biggest tourist hub. Vardø is one of Norway's most extreme and least-visited outposts; Tromsø is one of its most popular winter destinations with world-class tourism infrastructure.

→ Tromsø wins comprehensively on visitor experience and infrastructure; Vardø appeals to extreme travellers seeking Norway's geographic edge with authentic Barents Sea character and almost no other tourists.