Beef Franks vs Polish Kielbasa
Overall, Polish Kielbasa has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 4 of our comparison points versus 0.
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Beef Franks | Polish Kielbasa |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | e | e |
| NOVA group | 4 | 4 |
| Calories | 301 kcal | 250 kcal |
| Fat | 24.8 g | 19.6 g |
| Saturated fat | 9.7 g | 6.3 g |
| Sugars | 1.8 g | 1.8 g |
| Salt | 2.4 g | 2.4 g |
| Fiber | 0 g | 1.8 g |
| Protein | 13.3 g | 12.5 g |
| Additives | 2 | 1 |
| Allergens | Beef | Beef |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Polish Kielbasa has 17% fewer calories (250 kcal vs 301 kcal).
- Polish Kielbasa has 21% less fat (19.6 g vs 24.8 g).
- Polish Kielbasa has 36% less saturated fat (6.3 g vs 9.7 g).
- Polish Kielbasa has 100% more fiber (1.8 g vs 0 g).
Ingredients
Beef Franks
BEEF, WATER, WITH 2% OR LESS OF THE FOLLOWING: SALT, SUGAR, SPICES INCLUDING PAPRIKA, CORN SYRUP, HYDROLYZED CORN PROTEIN, SAFFLOWER OIL, DEXTROSE, NATURAL FLAVORINGS, POTASSIUM CHLORIDE, SODIUM PHOSPHATES, SODIUM ERYTHORBATE, SODIUM NITRITE
Polish Kielbasa
Beef, water, corn syrup, with 2% or less of the following, salt, spices including, paprika, dextrose, flavorings, hardwood smoked sugar, beef stock, hydrolyzed vegetable protein, sodium ethorbate, sodium nitrate
FAQ
Which is healthier: Beef Franks or Polish Kielbasa?
Overall, Polish Kielbasa 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?
Polish Kielbasa has fewer calories: 250 kcal versus 301 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Beef Franks has less sugar: 1.8 g versus 1.8 g per 100 g.