Ah terra vs Rookworst
Overall, Ah terra 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 | Ah terra | Rookworst |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | d | e |
| NOVA group | — | 4 |
| Calories | 187 kcal | 266 kcal |
| Fat | 11 g | 23 g |
| Saturated fat | 9.1 g | 9 g |
| Sugars | 2.5 g | 0.5 g |
| Salt | 1 g | 1.8 g |
| Fiber | 7.1 g | 0.5 g |
| Protein | 11 g | 14 g |
| Additives | 0 | 6 |
| Allergens | None listed | None listed |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Ah terra has 30% fewer calories (187 kcal vs 266 kcal).
- Ah terra has 52% less fat (11 g vs 23 g).
- Rookworst has 80% less sugar (0.5 g vs 2.5 g).
- Ah terra has 44% less salt (1 g vs 1.8 g).
- Ah terra has 93% more fiber (7.1 g vs 0.5 g).
- Rookworst has 21% more protein (14 g vs 11 g).
- Ah terra has the better Nutri-Score.
Ingredients
Ah terra
Not available.
Rookworst
Varkensvlees 89%, water, zout, rundercollageen, mineraal zout (kalium), voedingszuur (E330), natuurlijk aroma, stabilisator E451, E452), antioxidant (E301, E392), rookaroma, conserveermiddel (E250), vitamine B12
FAQ
Which is healthier: Ah terra or Rookworst?
Overall, Ah terra 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?
Ah terra has fewer calories: 187 kcal versus 266 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Rookworst has less sugar: 0.5 g versus 2.5 g per 100 g.