Cannelloni vs Spinach & Ricotta Cannelloni
Overall, Cannelloni has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 4 of our comparison points versus 1.
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Cannelloni | Spinach & Ricotta Cannelloni |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | c | c |
| NOVA group | — | 3 |
| Calories | 116 kcal | 138 kcal |
| Fat | 3.7 g | 8.6 g |
| Saturated fat | 1.4 g | 3.9 g |
| Sugars | 2.1 g | 2.8 g |
| Salt | 0.9 g | 0.5 g |
| Fiber | 1.2 g | — |
| Protein | 5 g | 5.5 g |
| Additives | 0 | 0 |
| Allergens | None listed | Eggs, Gluten, Milk |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Cannelloni has 16% fewer calories (116 kcal vs 138 kcal).
- Cannelloni has 57% less fat (3.7 g vs 8.6 g).
- Cannelloni has 64% less saturated fat (1.4 g vs 3.9 g).
- Cannelloni has 25% less sugar (2.1 g vs 2.8 g).
- Spinach & Ricotta Cannelloni has 40% less salt (0.5 g vs 0.9 g).
- Only Spinach & Ricotta Cannelloni lists: Eggs, Gluten, Milk.
Ingredients
Cannelloni
Not available.
Spinach & Ricotta Cannelloni
Whole milk, ricotta cheese (milk) (17%), tomatoes, cooked free range egg pasta (durum wheat semolina, water, pasteurised free range egg, pasteurised free range egg albumen), spinach (13%), water, mature Cheddar cheese (milk), double cream (milk), regato cheese (milk), cornflour, rapeseed oil, garlic purée, wheat flour (wheat flour, calcium carbonate, iron, niacin, thiamin), demerara sugar, salt, tomato paste, basil, nutmeg, sunflower oil, white pepper, black pepper, bay leaf.
FAQ
Which is healthier: Cannelloni or Spinach & Ricotta Cannelloni?
Overall, Cannelloni 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?
Cannelloni has fewer calories: 116 kcal versus 138 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Cannelloni has less sugar: 2.1 g versus 2.8 g per 100 g.