Baking powder vs Royal Baking Powder 450G
Overall, Royal Baking Powder 450G has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 5 of our comparison points versus 1.
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Baking powder | Royal Baking Powder 450G |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | e | a |
| NOVA group | 4 | 4 |
| Calories | 105 kcal | 0 kcal |
| Fat | 0.4 g | 0 g |
| Saturated fat | 0.1 g | 0 g |
| Sugars | 0.1 g | 0 g |
| Salt | 39.1 g | 0 g |
| Fiber | — | 0 g |
| Protein | 2.7 g | 0 g |
| Additives | 4 | 2 |
| Allergens | Gluten | None listed |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Royal Baking Powder 450G has no calories, while Baking powder has 105 kcal.
- Royal Baking Powder 450G has no fat, while Baking powder has 0.4 g.
- Royal Baking Powder 450G has no salt, while Baking powder has 39.1 g.
- Baking powder has 100% more protein (2.7 g vs 0 g).
- Royal Baking Powder 450G has the better Nutri-Score.
- Only Baking powder lists: Gluten.
Ingredients
Baking powder
Correcteur d'acidité: pyrophosphate de sodium (E450), poudre à lever: bicarbonate de sodium (E500), farine de blé,
Royal Baking Powder 450G
Raising agents (disodium diphosphate, sodium hydrogen corn starch. May contain milk. Product without Gluten.
FAQ
Which is healthier: Baking powder or Royal Baking Powder 450G?
Overall, Royal Baking Powder 450G 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?
Royal Baking Powder 450G has fewer calories: 0 kcal versus 105 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Royal Baking Powder 450G has less sugar: 0 g versus 0.1 g per 100 g.