Comparison

Bâton de Berger Mini nature vs Fine saveur de viande séchée

Overall, Fine saveur de viande séchée has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 5 of our comparison points versus 0.

Nutrition per 100 g

NutrientBâton de Berger Mini natureFine saveur de viande séchée
Nutri-Score e e
NOVA group 4 4
Calories 510 kcal 294 kcal
Fat 42 g 13.2 g
Saturated fat 16 g 4.7 g
Sugars 3.2 g 2.1 g
Salt 5 g 4.7 g
Fiber — 0 g
Protein 29 g 40.3 g
Additives52
AllergensMilkMilk

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

Key differences

  • Fine saveur de viande séchée has 42% fewer calories (294 kcal vs 510 kcal).
  • Fine saveur de viande séchée has 69% less fat (13.2 g vs 42 g).
  • Fine saveur de viande séchée has 71% less saturated fat (4.7 g vs 16 g).
  • Fine saveur de viande séchée has 34% less sugar (2.1 g vs 3.2 g).
  • Fine saveur de viande séchée has 28% more protein (40.3 g vs 29 g).

Ingredients

Bâton de Berger Mini nature

Viande de porc (origine : UE), sel lactose, dextrose, épices, antioxydant: acide ascorbique, extrait de romarin, conservateur: nitrite de sodium, ferments. Enveloppe : alginate de sodium, cellulose ou collagène, cellulose. Présence possible de fruits à coques.

Fine saveur de viande séchée

Viande de porc* , sel , _lactose_ , dextrose , sucre , poudre de _lait_, vin , épices , conservateurs : nitrate de potassium, nitrite de sodium , arôme , ferments,

FAQ

Which is healthier: Bâton de Berger Mini nature or Fine saveur de viande séchée?

Overall, Fine saveur de viande séchée 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?

Fine saveur de viande séchée has fewer calories: 294 kcal versus 510 kcal per 100 g.

Which has less sugar?

Fine saveur de viande séchée has less sugar: 2.1 g versus 3.2 g per 100 g.

More comparisons