Comparison

Beef Stock Cubes vs Caldo verduras

Overall, Beef Stock Cubes has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 5 of our comparison points versus 2.

Nutrition per 100 g

NutrientBeef Stock CubesCaldo verduras
Nutri-Score — —
NOVA group 4 4
Calories 6 kcal 190 kcal
Fat 0.5 g 4.1 g
Saturated fat 0.3 g 0.6 g
Sugars 0.5 g 2.6 g
Salt 0.9 g 52.9 g
Fiber 0.5 g 1.7 g
Protein 0.5 g 13.7 g
Additives12
AllergensCeleryCelery

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

Key differences

  • Beef Stock Cubes has 97% fewer calories (6 kcal vs 190 kcal).
  • Beef Stock Cubes has 88% less fat (0.5 g vs 4.1 g).
  • Beef Stock Cubes has 50% less saturated fat (0.3 g vs 0.6 g).
  • Beef Stock Cubes has 81% less sugar (0.5 g vs 2.6 g).
  • Beef Stock Cubes has 98% less salt (0.9 g vs 52.9 g).
  • Caldo verduras has 71% more fiber (1.7 g vs 0.5 g).
  • Caldo verduras has 96% more protein (13.7 g vs 0.5 g).

Ingredients

Beef Stock Cubes

Salt, vegetable fats (palm, shea, sal), starch, flavourings, sugar, yeast extract, beef fat (3%) [beef fat, antioxidant (extracts of rosemary)], beef stock powder (2%), caramel syrup, onion powder, maltodextrin, parsley, carrots, spices (parsley root powder, _celery_ seeds).

Caldo verduras

Sal, potenciadores del sabor (E621, E635), almidón, extracto de levadura, hortalizas (cebolla, zanahoria, puerro, tomate, espinaca) (7,1%), aceite de oliva (4%), aromas naturales, especias (cúrcuma, perejil), azúcar caramelizado. Trazas de apio.

FAQ

Which is healthier: Beef Stock Cubes or Caldo verduras?

Overall, Beef Stock Cubes 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?

Beef Stock Cubes has fewer calories: 6 kcal versus 190 kcal per 100 g.

Which has less sugar?

Beef Stock Cubes has less sugar: 0.5 g versus 2.6 g per 100 g.

More comparisons