Comparison

Biologische tarwebloem vs Shangai Sixi Kaofu Salad

Overall, Biologische tarwebloem has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 8 of our comparison points versus 1.

Nutrition per 100 g

NutrientBiologische tarwebloemShangai Sixi Kaofu Salad
Nutri-Score a d
NOVA group 1 —
Calories 352 kcal 180 kcal
Fat 1.1 g 9 g
Saturated fat 0.4 g 1.5 g
Sugars 1.8 g 7 g
Salt 0 g 1.5 g
Fiber 4.5 g 1 g
Protein 12.6 g 10 g
Additives00
AllergensGlutenNone listed

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

Key differences

  • Shangai Sixi Kaofu Salad has 49% fewer calories (180 kcal vs 352 kcal).
  • Biologische tarwebloem has 88% less fat (1.1 g vs 9 g).
  • Biologische tarwebloem has 73% less saturated fat (0.4 g vs 1.5 g).
  • Biologische tarwebloem has 74% less sugar (1.8 g vs 7 g).
  • Biologische tarwebloem has no salt, while Shangai Sixi Kaofu Salad has 1.5 g.
  • Biologische tarwebloem has 78% more fiber (4.5 g vs 1 g).
  • Biologische tarwebloem has 21% more protein (12.6 g vs 10 g).
  • Biologische tarwebloem has the better Nutri-Score.
  • Only Biologische tarwebloem lists: Gluten.

Ingredients

Biologische tarwebloem

100% biologische tarwebloem

Shangai Sixi Kaofu Salad

Not available.

FAQ

Which is healthier: Biologische tarwebloem or Shangai Sixi Kaofu Salad?

Overall, Biologische tarwebloem 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?

Shangai Sixi Kaofu Salad has fewer calories: 180 kcal versus 352 kcal per 100 g.

Which has less sugar?

Biologische tarwebloem has less sugar: 1.8 g versus 7 g per 100 g.

More comparisons