The authors examine the role of Mediterranean cyclones in the formation of compound extremes from different perspectives including the distance from the event, the dynamic features, and the type of the cyclone.

The paper is beautifully written with a comprehensive discussion of the results that is extensively supported by the literature. I consider that it should be accepted for publication, but there are some points that needs to be corrected or clarified.

Specific comments

• Section 2.1a: Please justify why a coarser temporal and spatial resolution were chosen instead of the available ones from ERA5? The higher resolution wouldn’t provide an added-value in the analysis performed?
• Section 2.1b: As also stated by the authors, negative wave biases are known especially for coastal areas. Why didn’t the authors consider using a much higher resolution dataset for the waves available by Copernicus? I’m afraid that this underestimation could largely affect the frequencies of the wave-wind compounds given that a threshold for wave (i.e., 2m) is set.
• Section 2.4 and in the rest of the text: p(e) is not absolute frequency, it’s relative.
• Unfortunately, almost all figures are difficult to read. I would suggest trying different colour palettes and patterns and/or increase the size.
• I would suggest a proof reading of the text, as there are some errors regarding syntax and, mainly, punctuation.

Minor comments

• Abstract, line 11: What are these peaks? Spatial? Please clarify.
• Abstract, line 11: The “proportion of cyclone-related compounds” over what?
• Abstract in general: I think the abstract does not capture well the content of the paper.
• Line 53: What do you mean with “objective regions”?
• Section 2.2.1: Consider adding a table that could be used as a reference for section 4.3, containing the number of the cluster, the season in which appears and the associated weather configuration (and maybe the region of max occurrence).
• Line 152: Could you elaborate on how the “unit valued grid points” are defined?
• Line 222: Which these factors are?
• Lines 234-236: Could you elaborate on why this happens?

Very minor comments

• Lines 18 & 21: 5 November or November 5^th or the 5^th of November
• Line 22: I don’t think Wikipedia is an appropriate citation. Please consider other sources.
• Lines 52-55: Please check syntax
• Line 157: n is not defined; I suppose is the number of events. And N equals ~7200?
• Lines 175-177: Check syntax
• Line 179: Which year?
• Caption Figure 2: I don’t see “negative dashed” red contours. Is this correct?
• Line 211: “most” instead of “must”
• Line 220: “towards the south west” in which season?
• Line 314: “Lions” instead of “Lion”
• Lines 471-472: This paper is published.
• Lines 494-495: This paper is published (2024)
• Line 518: Journal and pages are missing
• Line 559-560: This is a pre-print now
• Line 567: Journal and pages are missing