A la SERNIK z brzoskwiniami vs Rijstdessert
Overall, A la SERNIK z brzoskwiniami has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 6 of our comparison points versus 2.
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | A la SERNIK z brzoskwiniami | Rijstdessert |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | c | e |
| NOVA group | 4 | — |
| Calories | 92 kcal | 120 kcal |
| Fat | 0.5 g | 3 g |
| Saturated fat | 0.2 g | 2.3 g |
| Sugars | 20 g | 12.1 g |
| Salt | 0 g | 49.2 g |
| Protein | 1.5 g | 3.3 g |
| Additives | 0 | 0 |
| Allergens | Milk | None listed |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- A la SERNIK z brzoskwiniami has 23% fewer calories (92 kcal vs 120 kcal).
- A la SERNIK z brzoskwiniami has 83% less fat (0.5 g vs 3 g).
- A la SERNIK z brzoskwiniami has 91% less saturated fat (0.2 g vs 2.3 g).
- Rijstdessert has 40% less sugar (12.1 g vs 20 g).
- A la SERNIK z brzoskwiniami has 100% less salt (0 g vs 49.2 g).
- Rijstdessert has 55% more protein (3.3 g vs 1.5 g).
- A la SERNIK z brzoskwiniami has the better Nutri-Score.
- Only A la SERNIK z brzoskwiniami lists: Milk.
Ingredients
A la SERNIK z brzoskwiniami
Gotowany grys ryżowy 30% (woda, grys ryżowy), przecier jabłkowy 15%, jogurt naturalny 13%, zagęszczony sok jabłkowy, przecier brzoskwiniowy 12%, przecier bananowy. sok bananowy z zagęszczonego soku, zagęszczony sok brzoskwiniowy 2%, aromaty.
Rijstdessert
n JE BO DESSERT SERVEER EENS MET KANEEL HEIDEM PER PORTE AN 1906 760KD 180CAL Qua
FAQ
Which is healthier: A la SERNIK z brzoskwiniami or Rijstdessert?
Overall, A la SERNIK z brzoskwiniami has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. We compare Nutri-Score, processing level and seven nutrients per 100 g. Your own needs (for example low sugar or high protein) may make a different choice better for you.
Which has fewer calories?
A la SERNIK z brzoskwiniami has fewer calories: 92 kcal versus 120 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Rijstdessert has less sugar: 12.1 g versus 20 g per 100 g.