Cacao nacional pure ECUADOR vs Pointe de fleur de sel
Neither product is clearly better overall — it depends on what matters most to you.
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Cacao nacional pure ECUADOR | Pointe de fleur de sel |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | — | e |
| NOVA group | 3 | 4 |
| Calories | 614 kcal | 545 kcal |
| Fat | 43.9 g | 32 g |
| Saturated fat | 28.1 g | 19 g |
| Sugars | 23.4 g | 55 g |
| Salt | 0.5 g | 0.8 g |
| Fiber | — | 0 g |
| Protein | — | 7 g |
| Additives | 0 | 2 |
| Allergens | None listed | Gluten, Milk, Soybeans |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Pointe de fleur de sel has 11% fewer calories (545 kcal vs 614 kcal).
- Pointe de fleur de sel has 27% less fat (32 g vs 43.9 g).
- Pointe de fleur de sel has 32% less saturated fat (19 g vs 28.1 g).
- Cacao nacional pure ECUADOR has 57% less sugar (23.4 g vs 55 g).
- Cacao nacional pure ECUADOR has 38% less salt (0.5 g vs 0.8 g).
- Cacao nacional pure ECUADOR is less processed (lower NOVA group).
- Only Pointe de fleur de sel lists: Gluten, Milk, Soybeans.
Ingredients
Cacao nacional pure ECUADOR
Pâte de cacao Nacional biologique, sucre de canne biologique, beurre de cacao biologique et fleur de sel du Pacifique. Peut contenir des traces de noix, de lait et de soja.
Pointe de fleur de sel
Sucre, beurre de cacao, poudre de LAIT, pâte de cacao, LACTOSE, poudre de LAIT écrémé, fleur de sel 0,6%, émulsifiant (lécithine de SOJA), extrait de malt d'ORGE, arôme.
FAQ
Which is healthier: Cacao nacional pure ECUADOR or Pointe de fleur de sel?
Neither product is clearly better overall — it depends on what matters most to you. 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?
Pointe de fleur de sel has fewer calories: 545 kcal versus 614 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Cacao nacional pure ECUADOR has less sugar: 23.4 g versus 55 g per 100 g.