Bâton de Berger mini vs Le fuet pur porc
Overall, Le fuet pur porc 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 | Bâton de Berger mini | Le fuet pur porc |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | e | e |
| NOVA group | 4 | 4 |
| Calories | 510 kcal | 425 kcal |
| Fat | 42 g | 35 g |
| Saturated fat | 16 g | 12 g |
| Sugars | 3.2 g | 2.1 g |
| Salt | 5 g | 3.5 g |
| Fiber | — | 0 g |
| Protein | 29 g | 24 g |
| Additives | 4 | 3 |
| Allergens | Milk | Milk |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Le fuet pur porc has 17% fewer calories (425 kcal vs 510 kcal).
- Le fuet pur porc has 17% less fat (35 g vs 42 g).
- Le fuet pur porc has 25% less saturated fat (12 g vs 16 g).
- Le fuet pur porc has 34% less sugar (2.1 g vs 3.2 g).
- Le fuet pur porc has 30% less salt (3.5 g vs 5 g).
- Bâton de Berger mini has 17% more protein (29 g vs 24 g).
Ingredients
Bâton de Berger mini
Viande de porc (origine: UE), sel, LACTOSE, dextrose, épices et plantes aromatiques, antioxydant: acide ascorbique, conservateurs : nitrite de sodium, ferments, Enveloppe : alginate de sodium, cellulose ou collagène, cellulose, Présence possible de fruits à coques, 180g de viande utilisés pour la préparation de 100 g de produit fini,
Le fuet pur porc
Viande de porc (Origine: Espagne), sel, maltodextrine, dextrine, arôme, dextrose, épices, antioxydant: ascorbate de sodium; conservateur: nitrite de sodium.
FAQ
Which is healthier: Bâton de Berger mini or Le fuet pur porc?
Overall, Le fuet pur porc 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?
Le fuet pur porc has fewer calories: 425 kcal versus 510 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Le fuet pur porc has less sugar: 2.1 g versus 3.2 g per 100 g.