Comparison
Azafrán en hebra vs Safranfäden
Overall, Azafrán en hebra has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 2 of our comparison points versus 0.
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Azafrán en hebra | Safranfäden |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | — | — |
| NOVA group | — | 1 |
| Calories | 368 kcal | 352 kcal |
| Fat | 5.9 g | 5.9 g |
| Saturated fat | 0 g | 1.6 g |
| Sugars | 0 g | 42.4 g |
| Salt | 0.1 g | 0.4 g |
| Fiber | — | 3.9 g |
| Protein | 11.4 g | 11.4 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
- Azafrán en hebra has no saturated fat, while Safranfäden has 1.6 g.
- Azafrán en hebra has no sugar, while Safranfäden has 42.4 g.
Ingredients
Azafrán en hebra
Not available.
Safranfäden
Safran
FAQ
Which is healthier: Azafrán en hebra or Safranfäden?
Overall, Azafrán en hebra 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?
Safranfäden has fewer calories: 352 kcal versus 368 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Azafrán en hebra has less sugar: 0 g versus 42.4 g per 100 g.