Bio Rinder Rumpsteak vs Paprika / 0 Spitzpaprika
Overall, Bio Rinder Rumpsteak 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 | Bio Rinder Rumpsteak | Paprika / 0 Spitzpaprika |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | a | a |
| NOVA group | 1 | 4 |
| Calories | 129 kcal | 144 kcal |
| Fat | 5 g | 6 g |
| Saturated fat | 2 g | 1 g |
| Sugars | 0 g | 0.5 g |
| Salt | 0 g | 1 g |
| Fiber | 0 g | — |
| Protein | 21 g | 22 g |
| Additives | 0 | 2 |
| Allergens | None listed | Celery |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Bio Rinder Rumpsteak has 10% fewer calories (129 kcal vs 144 kcal).
- Bio Rinder Rumpsteak has 17% less fat (5 g vs 6 g).
- Paprika / 0 Spitzpaprika has 50% less saturated fat (1 g vs 2 g).
- Bio Rinder Rumpsteak has no sugar, while Paprika / 0 Spitzpaprika has 0.5 g.
- Bio Rinder Rumpsteak has no salt, while Paprika / 0 Spitzpaprika has 1 g.
- Bio Rinder Rumpsteak is less processed (lower NOVA group).
- Only Paprika / 0 Spitzpaprika lists: Celery.
Ingredients
Bio Rinder Rumpsteak
Rindfleisch
Paprika / 0 Spitzpaprika
Putenfleisch 85%, Kochbrühe (Putenfleisch,Wasser), Speisegelatine (Rind), jodiertes Speisesalz ( Speisesalz, Kaliumjodat), Dextrose, Gewürzte (U.a.Sellerie), Gewürzextrakt, Antioxidantien: Natriumascorbat, Konservierungsstoff:Natiumnitrit.
FAQ
Which is healthier: Bio Rinder Rumpsteak or Paprika / 0 Spitzpaprika?
Overall, Bio Rinder Rumpsteak 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?
Bio Rinder Rumpsteak has fewer calories: 129 kcal versus 144 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Bio Rinder Rumpsteak has less sugar: 0 g versus 0.5 g per 100 g.