Comparison

Bastogne vs Croc sablé Goût choco

Overall, Croc sablé Goût choco has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 3 of our comparison points versus 2.

Nutrition per 100 g

NutrientBastogneCroc sablé Goût choco
Nutri-Score e e
NOVA group 4 4
Calories 487 kcal 499 kcal
Fat 20 g 23 g
Saturated fat 9.7 g 11 g
Sugars 41 g 29 g
Salt 0.8 g 0.7 g
Fiber 1.4 g 2.8 g
Protein 5.3 g 6.1 g
Additives24
AllergensEggs, Gluten, Sesame seedsGluten, Milk, Soybeans

Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).

Key differences

  • Bastogne has 13% less fat (20 g vs 23 g).
  • Bastogne has 12% less saturated fat (9.7 g vs 11 g).
  • Croc sablé Goût choco has 29% less sugar (29 g vs 41 g).
  • Croc sablé Goût choco has 50% more fiber (2.8 g vs 1.4 g).
  • Croc sablé Goût choco has 13% more protein (6.1 g vs 5.3 g).
  • Only Bastogne lists: Eggs, Sesame seeds.
  • Only Croc sablé Goût choco lists: Milk, Soybeans.

Ingredients

Bastogne

Farine de BLÉ 45 %, sucre, huile de palme, sucre candi en poudre 9,9 %, sirop de fructose-glucose, ŒUFS, sirop de sucre candi, poudre à lever (carbonates de sodium), colorant (caramel ordinaire), sirop de glucose, cannelle en poudre 0,2 %, sel, arôme. PEUT CONTENIR SÉSAME.

Croc sablé Goût choco

Farine de BLÉ 48 %, sucre, huile de palme, cacao maigre en poudre 4 %, lactosérum en poudre (de LAIT), sirop de glucose, amidon de BLÉ, sel, poudres à lever (carbonates d'ammonium, carbonates de sodium), émulsifiant (lecithines de SOJA), arôme.

FAQ

Which is healthier: Bastogne or Croc sablé Goût choco?

Overall, Croc sablé Goût choco 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?

Bastogne has fewer calories: 487 kcal versus 499 kcal per 100 g.

Which has less sugar?

Croc sablé Goût choco has less sugar: 29 g versus 41 g per 100 g.

More comparisons