A More Complete Via Ferrata Grading System – Introducing MforE

Via ferratas offer thrilling adventures in stunning mountain settings, but their diverse challenges, technical climbing, endurance demands, remote access, and high-altitude conditions, require a clear, comprehensive grading system which is currently not available.

Why a New Ferrata Grading Is Needed?

Existing scales and gradings focus mainly on technical difficulty and use a 5 or 6 level scale, and there are quite a few of them like Austrian, German, French, Italian grading, etc.

In 2016 the UIAA Mountaineering Commission decided to adopt the Italian 5-scale for grading of Via Ferrata as its international standard.

This and other existing gradings typically ignore various other aspects of a ferrata route, like the total length of passages ith cables, the access from the valley to the actual ferrata start, and altitude/elevation.

Though, additional grades are mentioned in the link above, but you will not see them applied in ferrata gradings anywhere.

There exists the Fletcher/Smith grading with combined numerical (from 1 to 5) rates for technical aspect, and with letters (A, B, C)  for the overall alpine commitment (or ‘seriousness’). But this is not granular and detailed enough, and the meaning of the term commitment is far from obvious.

Therefore, based on my own experience, this article introduces a new grading system that balances simplicity and depth. It evaluates via ferratas across three main criteria, ensuring climbers can assess routes holistically.

---

What We Propose

Creating a via ferrata grading system that incorporates technical difficulty, length, and access provides climbers with a clear understanding of the overall challenge.

Below, I propose a structured grading system based on these criteria, with refined formulations for clarity and consistency. The system uses a combination of letters and numbers across five levels for each criterion, ensuring intuitive and comprehensive grading.

This Mountains for Everybody (MforE or M4E) ferrata grading is used throughout the site.

Proposed MforE (M4E) Via Ferrata Grading System

The MforE (M4E) grading system evaluates the following key criteria:

• Technical difficulty: Assesses exposure, foot support, and arm stress. This is more or less the same or very similar to what you have in most of the existing ratings.
• Length: Measures the physical and time commitment required to complete the ferrata cables alone. This may be hard to grade properly; a horizontal ferrata is usually much easier to pass than a vertical ferrata. 
• Access route difficulty: Evaluates the approach to the start of the via ferrata, including duration and physical demand.

Each criterion is graded on a 5-level scale, using letters (A to E) for technical difficulty and access route difficulty, and numbers (1 to 5) for length and altitude to differentiate them visually and avoid confusion.

A combined grade (e.g., C-3-B or C3B) provides a concise summary of the route’s overall challenge. However, if this looks too complicated, and if you want to rely on the criterion that is very similar to those you find in other sources, then focus on the first letter in the combined grade, the letter C in the given example.

But what about altitude of the ferrata? It is very different when you climb a ferrata in some low valleys and gorges, like Magnifici 4, as compared with high altitude climbs with a considerably reduced oxygen level.

Indeed, one extra criterion could be added, but the rating becomes too complicated and cumbersome, and it may become difficult to remember what is what. 

I think that for most practical purposes, the altitude grading can be incorporated into the mentioned access route difficulty. But see more about this below.

---

Suggestions and Rationale

Why Letters and Numbers? 

Using letters (A–E) for technical difficulty and access, and numbers (1–5) for length, makes the grades visually distinct and easier to parse. This avoids confusion (e.g., 3-3-3 would be ambiguous).

Letters align with some existing via ferrata grading systems (e.g., European systems like the Italian A–F scale), making it intuitive for climbers familiar with those.

Refined Criteria

Technical Difficulty: Combining exposure, foot support, and arm stress into one metric simplifies the system while capturing the core challenges of climbing. Exposure is critical for psychological difficulty, while foot support and arm stress reflect physical demands.

Length: Using distance in grading ensures consistency. This novel scale is calibrated for an average climber to make it broadly applicable. 

But as mentioned above, the actual shape of the ferrata and the terrain where it is placed must be taken into account. Take the ferrata on Cima delle Nove as one example, it is very mild regarding elevation gain.

On the other hand, the short Averau Ferrata is almost vertical, and the same holds for Ferrata Ombreta. These featured must be considered within technical difficulty rating.

Access: This is yet another novel addition compared to most via ferrata grading systems (e.g., the French or Italian scales), which focus only on the ferrata climb itself. Including access acknowledges the real-world impact of a strenuous approach, especially in remote mountain settings.

The point is the following: when you decide to do a ferrata route, you have to get there in the first place. Therefore, it is not only about cables, you may have to do lots of walk or scramble before you get to the point to attach yourself to cables. 

If you have been on Ferrata Bianchi on Monte Cristallo di Mezzo, you will know what I am talking about. The access route is incredibly hard and unpleasant.

Five Levels: Five levels provide enough granularity to distinguish between routes without being overly complex. 

Below you can read more about each of the mentioned grading criteria.

---

1. Technical Difficulty (Letters: A to E)

This criterion evaluates the physical and mental demands of the ferrata climbing itself, including:

• Exposure: The sense of height and openness, affecting psychological difficulty.
• Foot support: The quality and availability of footholds (natural or artificial).
• Arms stress: The reliance on upper body strength for progression or security.

Scale:

• A (Very Easy): Minimal exposure, abundant and stable footholds, little to no arm strength required (e.g., ladder-like sections, gentle slopes).
• B (Easy): Low exposure, reliable footholds, occasional arm use for balance or light pulling.
• C (Moderate): Moderate exposure, smaller or less frequent footholds, regular arm engagement for climbing or stability.
• D (Difficult): High exposure, sparse or precarious footholds, significant arm strength needed for sustained sections.
• E (Very Difficult): Extreme exposure, minimal or no natural footholds, intense and prolonged arm stress (e.g., overhanging sections).

---

2. Length (Numbers: 1 to 5)

This new criterion measures the total distance required to complete the via ferrata part alone, reflecting endurance demands. It accounts for the fact that a short, steep route may be less taxing overall than a long yet moderate one.

To better understand what I mean, you can compare Tomaselli ferrata (the video below) with Bolver-Lugli ferrata.

The former is technically much harder, but the length is around 326 meters, while the length of the latter is close to half a kilometer. After climbing them both, I can say with certainty that Bolver-Lugli was harder to me although it is technically less hard.

Scale:

• 1 (Very Short): Up to 50 meters. Minimal endurance required. A typical example of that type is Ferrata Ombreta (aka Ferrata Vernale, the photo above) which is around 50 meters long and it can be done in 20 minutes. But my technical rating of it is C. 

• 2 (Short): ~50–100 m. More stamina needed. Example of that type is Ra Šàra del Minighèl below Tofana di Rozes which is only around 75 meters long.

• 3 (Moderate): ~100–300 m. Sustained effort required.

• 4 (Long): ~300–500 m. Significant endurance demanded. One example of this type is the normal route to Monte Civetta.

• 5 (Very Long): over 500 m. High endurance and time commitment. Example of this type is the Bolver-Lugli ferrata (one of its part is shown in the picture below).

---

3. Access Route Difficulty (Letters: A to E)

This criterion evaluates the approach to the via ferrata’s actual starting point, considering the duration, elevation gain, and physical effort required. A strenuous approach can significantly increase the overall challenge.

To understand this better, consider the so-called normal route to Monte Civetta (the photo below). Dependent on the source, it is rated as easy to moderate, but you have to walk more than four hours and to gain a significant elevation before you get to the first of its 22 cables. 

Now, compare this with Ferrata Possneker (the picture below) which is technically much harder, but there you get to the cables after an easy 20 minutes walk from Passo Sella and this on a more or less flat ground.

When you get to the cables fresh and after such an easy walk, it will be far easier to climb the ferrata itself even if it is hard, than if you have a long walk from the valley before you get to the cables.

Scale:

• A (Very Easy): Short, flat approach (<1 hour, minimal elevation gain, or lift access). No significant fatigue.
• B (Easy): Moderate approach (1-2 hours, gentle slopes). Light effort, minimal impact on energy.
• C (Moderate): Longer approach (2-3 hours, moderate elevation gain). Noticeable effort, may cause mild fatigue.
• D (Difficult): Strenuous approach (3-4 hours, significant elevation gain or rough terrain). Likely to cause fatigue before climbing.
• E (Very Difficult): Extremely demanding approach (>4 hours, steep or technical terrain, major elevation gain, or high elevation in general). Significant fatigue before starting the ferrata route part.

---

Optional: Altitude Grading (Numbers: 1 to 5)

This is mentioned above, and here I present what I think would be a good approach to this optional grading. 

It is very different if you climb a ferrata somewhere in a river gorge a few steps from the car, than when you are at an elevation of 3000 meters and dizzy due to reduced oxygen level.

This criterion measures the altitude of the via ferrata’s starting point and highest point, reflecting physiological and environmental challenges.

Scale:

• 1 (Low): <1000 m above sea level. No altitude effects, stable weather very likely.
• 2 (Moderate): 1000–2000 m. Minimum altitude effects for unacclimatized climbers, low weather variability.
• 3 (High): 2000-3000 m. Noticeable altitude effects. High weather variability.
• 4 (Very high): 3000-4000 m. Significant altitude impact (fatigue, altitude sickness), often harsher conditions. Example, the photo below from Ferrata Bianchi on Monte Cristallo.
• 5 (Extreme): > 4000 m.

The scale given here is chosen to make it easier to remember, and also to allow grading for ferratas throughout the world. Perhaps you did not know, on the route to Mount Kenya (5199 meters), there is the highest ferrata in the world at 4985 meters. 

Therefore, within this site I do not use the 4-grading system, and altitude grading is included in the Access Route grading. But if you want to use it, the overall grade would combine the four criteria in the format: Technical-Length-Access-Altitude (e.g., B-5-E-3).

In the example above, B-5-E-3 means: An easy but very long route with an exhausting approach (endurance-focused), and at a high altitude.

---

MforE (M4E) Via Ferrata Grading System Summary

All presented above is summarized in the following table:

Technical Difficulty (A–E)	Length (1–5)	Access Route Difficulty (A–E)
A (Very Easy): Minimal exposure, stable footholds, little arm use.	1 (Very Short): <50 m, minimal endurance.	A (Very Easy): <1 hr, flat, no fatigue.
B (Easy): Low exposure, reliable footholds, occasional arm use.	2 (Short): 50–100 m, moderate stamina.	B (Easy): 1–2 hr, gentle slopes, light effort.
C (Moderate): Moderate exposure, smaller footholds, regular arm use.	3 (Moderate): 100–300 m, sustained effort.	C (Moderate): 2–3 hr, moderate elevation, mild fatigue.
D (Difficult): High exposure, sparse footholds, significant arm use.	4 (Long): 300–500 m, high endurance.	D (Difficult): 3–4 hr, steep terrain, likely fatigue.
E (Very Difficult): Extreme exposure, minimal footholds, intense arm stress.	5 (Very Long): >500 m, extreme endurance.	E (Very Difficult): >4 hr, steep/technical, significant fatigue.

---

Final Thoughts

Wherever you go, make sure you are never without a reliable via ferrata set. Sometimes it may be convenient to use a backpack with a removable hip belt so that it doesn’t interfere with the climbing harness. Also, have a windproof and waterproof hardshell jacket in the pack, weather at high elevations may change in no time.

Thank you for reading. Please provide feedback on the MforE system via this site to refine it based on real-world use, ensuring it evolves with community input. There is a comment section below.

---

FAQ

Why is a new via ferrata grading system needed?

Existing grading systems, like the Austrian, German, or Fletcher/Smith scales, often focus solely on technical difficulty, overlooking critical factors like route length, access challenges, or altitude effects.

The MforE system addresses these gaps by providing a holistic assessment, helping climbers better prepare for the full scope of a route’s demands, from physical endurance to logistical planning.

How does the MforE system improve safety for via ferrata climbers?

By incorporating access route difficulty and altitude, the MforE system highlights potential challenges before the climb begins, such as exhausting approaches or high-altitude conditions that could impact performance.

This comprehensive approach allows climbers to assess risks, plan acclimatization, and choose routes matching their skill and fitness levels, reducing the likelihood of accidents or overexertion.

Can beginners use the MforE grading system effectively?

Yes, the MforE system is designed to be intuitive, using a clear letter-number format (e.g., A-1-A for easy, short routes with simple access).

Beginners can quickly understand a route’s demands, while the system’s granularity helps them progress to more challenging ferratas with confidence, supported by detailed criteria like exposure and approach effort.

How does altitude affect via ferrata climbing, and why is it included?

Altitude impacts physical performance due to reduced oxygen levels, increasing fatigue and the risk of altitude sickness above 2000 meters.

Including altitude in the MforE system helps climbers anticipate these physiological challenges, especially on high-altitude routes like those in the Himalayas or Andes, ensuring better preparation and gear choices, such as oxygen supplements for extreme elevations.