November 2026
Four Seasons Kyoto vs Ritz-Carlton Kyoto: Which Property Is Better?
I'd pick the Four Seasons over the Ritz-Carlton for most Kyoto trips, and for every trip with children. For about the same money you get an 800-year-old pond garden and the loveliest pool in the city. The Ritz fights back with the river and the warmer staff, and from there you can walk to dinner.
Better overall hotel: The Four Seasons
Most days at the Four Seasons Kyoto a grey heron dropped into the pond garden and stood on a rock so still I thought it was a sculpture. That garden, Shakusui-en, is about 800 years old, and together with its skylit pool it's why the Four Seasons wins here. The Ritz-Carlton Kyoto has the river and the more personal staff, but step indoors and you could be in a smart hotel anywhere in Japan. For most trips (and every trip with kids) I'd take the Four Seasons.
Where I'd switch… if you want to walk out to dinner every night, book the Ritz. Pontocho is a 15-minute stroll downstream along the Kamogawa, while from the Four Seasons almost everything means a taxi.
Better rooms: The Four Seasons
When we first opened the door of our Four Seasons room, the late sun was pouring in and the whole place glowed amber. Hand-painted screens of cherry blossom and little birds sit either side of the bed, and there's a wooden balcony over the treetops to a temple roof, where I had my tea each morning. The Ritz's river-view king has the better window (half of Kyoto comes down to the banks in the evening) and one of the most comfortable beds I've slept in anywhere in Japan, but away from the glass it's sliding screens and wood panels, nice enough and pretty forgettable.
Either way, the view is worth paying for. At the Four Seasons that's a Premier Heritage Garden room over the pond (our side didn't see the water at all), and at the Ritz a river-facing Grand Deluxe Kamogawa high enough to clear the maples.
Better bathroom: The Ritz-Carlton
The Ritz's bathroom smelled of Diptyque's fig, with a deep tub, two basins and a walk-in shower with REAL pressure. Ours at the Four Seasons was beige marble with two black basins and a glass shower, perfectly pleasant, but nothing about it said Kyoto.
Better service: The Ritz-Carlton
The Ritz is the more personal of the two. Someone met us at the car, walked us straight up to our room and did the check-in over tea on the sofa, and by day two everyone knew our names. Ask the way anywhere and someone just walks you there. The Four Seasons team were warm and quick, but it's a big hotel (180 rooms and residences), nobody really got to know us, and a couple of small requests dragged.
Better bar: The Ritz-Carlton
For a nightcap I'd head to the Ritz. The Bar has leather armchairs in front of a wall of sake, and I got rather attached to their roasted green tea martini. SEY at the Four Seasons is a small izakaya-style bar on the pond, and its Smoky Old Fashioned comes under a cloud of cherry-wood smoke (it only has 38 seats, so book).
Better food: The Four Seasons, at breakfast
Mornings go to the Four Seasons. When the weather's good you eat breakfast out on EMBA's terrace by the pond, and the truffle onsen egg is the thing to order (the buffet itself is uneven, so stick to the menu). Breakfast at the Ritz was patchy (one morning three different people took our order within two minutes, then nobody came back), though Pierre Hermé's croissants help a lot. Dinner flips it. The tempura counter at the Ritz's Mizuki, just eight seats facing the chef, was the best meal of that stay, while EMBA is the Four Seasons' only all-day restaurant, and by the second evening I'd had enough of it.
Better pool and spa: The Four Seasons
The Four Seasons pool is the loveliest in Kyoto. It's 20 metres under skylights, with golden walls and cabanas hung with white drapes, and at midday there was hardly anyone in it. Downstairs the spa has a stone ofuro bath and a sauna, and you can book a sake bath. The Ritz's pool is the same length and heated, with a La Prairie spa next door, but it's underground with no daylight, and you'll be wearing a swim cap.
Better garden: The Four Seasons
Shakusui-en is about five acres, with two ponds split by an old stone bridge, and I could have stood on that bridge all morning watching the koi turn underneath. Late one afternoon I crossed the glass footbridge to the Fuju teahouse for a bowl of matcha, and it was my favourite hour of the whole stay. The Ritz has water running beside its entrance passage and a waterfall by the Lobby Lounge terrace, but its real garden is the river outside.
Better location: The Ritz-Carlton
For getting around, it's the Ritz. You're right on the Kamogawa with Nishiki Market and the edge of Gion close by, the subway is five minutes' walk, and at dusk couples sit along the riverbank spaced out almost perfectly. The Four Seasons is next door to Sanjusangendo, with Kiyomizu-dera 15 to 20 minutes uphill, but Gion and most of the restaurants mean a taxi.
Better for families: The Four Seasons
Both are good with kids (the Ritz leaves little robes in the room and runs Ritz Kids evenings, so you get a grown-up dinner). The Four Seasons goes further, though. The little ones eat free, there's a playroom for children aged three to eight and 48 connecting rooms, and they'll even set up a calligraphy lesson.
Better value: The Four Seasons
Prices are usually about level, and for the same money the Four Seasons gives you the garden and the better pool. With children under 18 staying free, it's an even easier sum for a family.
If it's your first time in Kyoto and there are just two of you, the Park Hyatt puts you right on the old lanes, and it goes head to head with the Four Seasons in my Four Seasons Kyoto vs Park Hyatt Kyoto comparison. My other Kyoto reviews are all on my Japan page.