Head-to-head match-up

Dana to Petra (Jordan Trail) vs Milford TrackWhich Hike is Harder?

61/100

Route A

Dana to Petra (Jordan Trail)

jordan

65/100

Route B

Milford Track

new-zealand

Quick Verdict

Which hike is harder?

The planning question most people actually need: is either route too hard—or too remote—for your skills and rescue margin right now?

Milford Track is slightly harder overall (65 vs 61 on our intensity index) because it has steeper, more technical terrain and footing. However, Dana to Petra (Jordan Trail) may still feel more demanding if you struggle with very long days or multi-week pacing.

Mission Context

Harder: Milford Track
More technical terrain (modeled footing & obstacles): Milford Track
More weather-sensitive across the full route commitment in this pairing: Milford Track
Remoteness ties (5/5)—still compare roads out and comms in dossiers.
Same hazard tier does not mean the same risk style: Dana to Petra and Milford Track concentrate consequences in different ways (terrain, weather, and decision pressure).
Better lower-consequence progression route before the other: Milford Track

Compare with another route

Key difference

Milford Track loads more into technical footing and terrain seriousness. Dana to Petra shifts more emphasis toward sheer mileage and multi-day endurance—even when the headline index looks milder. On our composite index, Milford Track still reads as the heavier overall commitment in this pairing.

Planning snapshot

Elevation context, daily rhythm, and footing—how the two profiles diverge in practice.

Category	Dana to Petra	Milford Track
Elevation context & weather feel	~1200 m — ridgelines run cooler and mistier; pack and plan like a mountain hike, not only a shore walk.	~1154 m — ridgelines run cooler and mistier; pack and plan like a mountain hike, not only a shore walk.
Daily rhythm & commitment	Multi-day — confirm how fixed overnight stops are before assuming you can improvise stages.	Shorter format — logistics are usually simpler than a week-long hut corridor.
Navigation read	See dossier navigation notes.	See dossier navigation notes.
Typical footing	Footing tracks technical ~32/100—see dossier terrain class for nuance.	Rough tread dominates—technical ~51/100 in our model reflects that underfoot grind.

Decision physics — deeper read

Pace and vertical geometry—use after the headline verdict when you want the numbers translated into trail feel.

Implied pace from dossier walking-hour bands: ~2.2 km/h on Milford Track versus ~2.0 km/h on Dana to Petra. That ≈9% gap in implied pace is often the clearest signal that raw distance is a weak proxy for how hard the days will feel.

Vertical density: ~35 m gain per km on Dana to Petra vs ~22 m/km on Milford Track (≈1.6× tighter on the steeper-per-km route)—classic “distance vs staircase” geometry.

Stairmaster factor: Dana to Petra packs more climbing into each kilometer—calves and quads work harder per minute than a flat map distance implies.

Hiker-Route Fit

All four experience tiers—nothing omitted. Scan where your profile lands; “Poor fit” is intentional when the gap is large.

Beginner

Dana

Poor fit

Milford

Stretch / prep

Intermediate

Dana

Poor fit

Milford

Good fit

Advanced

Dana

Stretch / prep

Milford

Good fit

Expert

Dana

Good fit

Milford

Good fit

Ground Truth	Dana to Petra	Milford Track
Hazard & consequences	heat and sun exposure: The transit across the Wadi Araba floor involves sustained exposure to temperatures exceeding 40°C in unshaded desert conditions. flash flood risk: Narrow canyon systems (Wadis) in the Rift Valley are subject to rapid flash flooding from localized rainfall in the eastern highlands.	sandfly menace: Sandflies at the end of the track (Sandfly Point) are legendary for their intensity.
Navigation & route	Active navigation each day: confirm waymarks, map, and bailout points before you lose light or visibility.	Active navigation each day: confirm waymarks, map, and bailout points before you lose light or visibility.
Weather exposure	Mountain or forest weather: mist, cold snaps, and rain that turns footing slick—budget slower days after wet spells.	extreme flooding and rainfall: Fiordland receives up to 8 meters of rain annually. Trails can become waist-deep in water within hours.
Access & resupply	Resupply & water: Eco-lodges / Mobile Camps Access & services: Access is typically via Amman to Dana Village. The return logistics are centered in Wadi Musa (Petra), where taxi/shuttle services connect back to Amman or Aqaba.	Access & services: Starts with a boat from Te Anau Downs. Returns via boat from Sandfly Point to Milford Sound, and then a bus back to Te Anau.
Comms & reach	Coverage: Negligible — Rescue is managed via regional police and Bedouin networks. Ground evacuation from the Wadi Araba or the Petra mountains is slow due to terrain fragmentation; satellite communication devices are recommended.	Coverage: None — Rangers at every hut have radio contact. Helicopter evacuation is standard for injuries or floods.

A day on the trail

One vibe line plus three bullets per route—enough to sanity-check pacing without re-reading the full dossier.

Dana to Petra

Feels like a compressed, high-focus outing—short miles can still feel serious when edges, slick rock, and crowds stack stress.

Modeled average: about 13–18 km per indexed calendar day (your stages can land above or below that band).
Walking-time hint from the dossier: 6–9 where hours are specified alongside days.
If you sit in that walking-hour band, implied pace is about 2.0 km per walking hour on an average day—compare routes on this, not on “eight hours is eight hours.”

Milford Track

Feels like mountain journeying where exposure, weather windows, and vertical pacing matter more than the flat map distance.

Friction dominates pace: boulders, moraines, or river work can make short map distances feel like very long days.
Modeled average: about 11–16 km per indexed calendar day (your stages can land above or below that band).
Walking-time hint from the dossier: 5–7 where hours are specified alongside days.

Terrain Differences

Dana to Petra (Jordan Trail): The Dana to Petra section of the Jordan Trail is a multi-day desert traverse connecting the Dana Biosphere Reserve to the archaeological site of Petra. The route transits through the Great Rift Valley, descending from the Dana ridge at 1,200 meters through the Wadi Dana gorge into the arid plains of Wadi Araba. High Desert Landscapes and Ancient Nabataean Paths. The trek offers a unique cross-section of the Dead Sea Rift's eastern edge.

Milford Track: The finest walk in the world. The Milford Track (53.5km / 33 miles) is New Zealand's most famous trekking route, limited to just 40 independent walkers per day. Starting with a boat journey across Lake Te Anau, the trail traces the Clinton and Arthur Valleys, crossing the legendary Mackinnon Pass (1,154m). Mackinnon Pass and the Waterfall Chaos. The 'X-Factor' of the Milford is the sense of absolute enclosure by nature.

Final verdict

Final verdict: for most hikers comparing these two treks, Milford Track is the tougher overall commitment in this pair; Dana to Petra (Jordan Trail) is the more approachable option.

Choose Milford Track if you want steeper, more technical hiking. Choose Dana to Petra (Jordan Trail) if you want longer-distance endurance and more days on the move.

Plan & prepare your hike

Ready to plan your hike?

Now that you have compared both routes, explore the full guide to prepare your trip—covering gear, logistics, and key planning steps.

Each guide includes route context, practical preparation advice, and curated resources to help you plan your hike.

Open guide · Dana to Petra Open guide · Milford Track

Who should choose which route?

Choose Dana to Petra if you:

You prefer the lighter logistical load while still getting a credible experience.
You want a clearer time box with fewer consecutive hard days.
You are building endurance before tackling bigger expedition-style routes.

Choose Milford Track if you:

You want the route our index ranks heavier in this head-to-head—then validate against the metrics table, not the headline number alone.
You can sustain multi-day load and recovery pressure across a week of consecutive hard days.
Our dossier tags audience around “Intermediate”—validate against your own experience.

Do not choose if…

Hard filters derived from remoteness, hazard tier, risks, and dossier audience tags—not polite suggestions.

Dana to Petra

Do not choose Dana to Petra if you are not already an expert-level wilderness traveler with relevant comparable trips behind you.
Do not choose if you cannot tolerate long stretches without services, reliable comms, or fast exit options.

Milford Track

Do not choose if you cannot tolerate long stretches without services, reliable comms, or fast exit options.
Do not choose if you cannot evaluate and manage cold or glacial river crossings safely.
Do not choose without a satellite communicator and a practiced emergency plan.

Keep browsing

Compare these hikes with others

Dana to Petra

Milford Track

Explore by difficulty

Jump to intensity buckets to find easier or harder routes than this pair on our index.

Metrics engine

Head-to-head performance variables computation.

Intensity Score

Route B — Higher Demand

Physical Load

Route A — More Taxing

Technical

Route B — More Technical

Distance

Route A — Longer

76 km

53.5 km

Elevation Gain

Route A — More vertical

2,679 m

1,200 m

Vertical density

Route A — More climb per km

~35 m/km

~22 m/km

Implied walking pace

Route A — Slower modeled pace

~2.0 km/h

~2.2 km/h

Highest Point

Route A — Higher summit

1,200 m

1,154 m

Duration

Route A — Longer commitment

5 days

4 days

Hazard Level

SERIOUS // HIGH CONSEQUENCE (4/5)

Reading the metrics

Technical score reflects terrain complexity in the model (footing, obstacles, sustained steepness), not perceived exposure or tourist-style edge risk.
Implied walking pace divides indexed horizontal distance per day by the midpoint of each dossier’s walking-hour band when both exist—a workload sanity check, not a stopwatch guarantee.
On short multi-day trips, some dossiers encode cumulative route hours (not per-day averages). When that pattern is detected, we show route-wide pace instead of a misleading per-day figure.
Vertical density is total modeled gain divided by horizontal route distance.

Technical score bands (0–100)

0–20 — Defined tread, few modeled obstacles—mostly hiking pace variance.
21–40 — Rougher path: loose stone, roots, mud, or slower footing.
41–60 — Steep or uneven moves; hands-on moves possible in places.
61–80 — Strong route-finding signals and/or sustained exposure in the dossier mix.
81–100 — High-consequence expedition or Arctic/wilderness terrain seriousness in the model.

Hazard level — what the labels mean

LOW // ACCESS (1/5)Bumps and bruises territory; help is usually close if you carry a phone.Low access friction for prepared walkers; slips still hurt, but margins are wide.
STANDARD // TRAIL (2/5)Injury possible; rescue is typically reachable in reasonable time when you call early.Standard trail stakes: weather, footing, and fatigue drive most incidents.
MODERATE // CHALLENGING (3/5)Serious harm is plausible—self-rescue skill and solid judgment matter as much as fitness.A bad decision or a fall can turn serious; self-rescue and navigation skills matter.
SERIOUS // HIGH CONSEQUENCE (4/5)Outcomes can be severe; professional rescue may be slow, limited, or weather-gated.Serious, high-consequence terrain; injuries can be severe and help may be slow.
LETHAL // NO-MARGIN (5/5)Mistakes can be fatal; rescue is uncertain, delayed, or impossible until conditions allow.Mistakes can be fatal; rescue is not guaranteed and is often weather- or logistics-gated.

Ascent

4,500 m

Ready to lock in a mission?

Dossier: Dana Dossier: Milford Compare with another route Full route index