Comparison
Boerenkool vs Boerenkool
Overall, Boerenkool has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 5 of our comparison points versus 0.
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Boerenkool | Boerenkool |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | a | a |
| NOVA group | 1 | 3 |
| Calories | 33 kcal | 33 kcal |
| Fat | 0.6 g | 1.3 g |
| Saturated fat | 0.1 g | 0.3 g |
| Sugars | 0.4 g | 0.9 g |
| Salt | 0.1 g | 0.5 g |
| Fiber | 4.7 g | 3.5 g |
| Protein | 3 g | 2.7 g |
| Additives | 0 | 0 |
| Allergens | None listed | None listed |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Boerenkool has 54% less fat (0.6 g vs 1.3 g).
- Boerenkool has 56% less sugar (0.4 g vs 0.9 g).
- Boerenkool has 84% less salt (0.1 g vs 0.5 g).
- Boerenkool has 26% more fiber (4.7 g vs 3.5 g).
- Boerenkool is less processed (lower NOVA group).
Ingredients
Boerenkool
boerenkool
Boerenkool
boerenkool, water, zout
FAQ
Which is healthier: Boerenkool or Boerenkool?
Overall, Boerenkool 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?
Boerenkool has fewer calories: 33 kcal versus 33 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Boerenkool has less sugar: 0.4 g versus 0.9 g per 100 g.