Assortiment charcuterie de montagne vs Assortiment de charcuterie Italienne ROSA DELL'ANGELLO
Overall, Assortiment charcuterie de montagne has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 3 of our comparison points versus 2.
Assortiment charcuterie de montagne
Assortiment de charcuterie Italienne ROSA DELL'ANGELLO
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Assortiment charcuterie de m... | Assortiment de charcuterie I... |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | e | e |
| NOVA group | — | — |
| Calories | 239 kcal | 380 kcal |
| Fat | 13 g | 28 g |
| Saturated fat | 4.6 g | 11 g |
| Sugars | 0.5 g | 0 g |
| Salt | 6.1 g | 4.5 g |
| Protein | 30 g | 31 g |
| Additives | 0 | 0 |
| Allergens | None listed | None listed |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Assortiment charcuterie de montagne has 37% fewer calories (239 kcal vs 380 kcal).
- Assortiment charcuterie de montagne has 54% less fat (13 g vs 28 g).
- Assortiment charcuterie de montagne has 58% less saturated fat (4.6 g vs 11 g).
- Assortiment de charcuterie Italienne ROSA DELL'ANGELLO has no sugar, while Assortiment charcuterie de montagne has 0.5 g.
- Assortiment de charcuterie Italienne ROSA DELL'ANGELLO has 26% less salt (4.5 g vs 6.1 g).
Ingredients
Assortiment charcuterie de montagne
Not available.
Assortiment de charcuterie Italienne ROSA DELL'ANGELLO
Not available.
FAQ
Which is healthier: Assortiment charcuterie de montagne or Assortiment de charcuterie Italienne ROSA DELL'ANGELLO?
Overall, Assortiment charcuterie de montagne 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?
Assortiment charcuterie de montagne has fewer calories: 239 kcal versus 380 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Assortiment de charcuterie Italienne ROSA DELL'ANGELLO has less sugar: 0 g versus 0.5 g per 100 g.