Comparison

Carotte patate douce lentilles corail façon dahl vs Prunes

Overall, Carotte patate douce lentilles corail façon dahl has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 5 of our comparison points versus 2.

Nutrition per 100 g

NutrientCarotte patate douce lentill...Prunes
Nutri-Score — —
NOVA group 3 1
Calories 55 kcal 71 kcal
Fat 1.2 g 0.5 g
Saturated fat 0.2 g 0.5 g
Sugars 3.2 g 11.1 g
Salt 0.1 g 0 g
Fiber 2.5 g 2.1 g
Protein 2 g 0.6 g
Additives00
AllergensNone listedNone listed

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

Key differences

  • Carotte patate douce lentilles corail façon dahl has 23% fewer calories (55 kcal vs 71 kcal).
  • Prunes has 58% less fat (0.5 g vs 1.2 g).
  • Carotte patate douce lentilles corail façon dahl has 60% less saturated fat (0.2 g vs 0.5 g).
  • Carotte patate douce lentilles corail façon dahl has 71% less sugar (3.2 g vs 11.1 g).
  • Carotte patate douce lentilles corail façon dahl has 14% more fiber (2.5 g vs 2.1 g).
  • Carotte patate douce lentilles corail façon dahl has 70% more protein (2 g vs 0.6 g).
  • Prunes is less processed (lower NOVA group).

Ingredients

Carotte patate douce lentilles corail façon dahl

44% carotte bio, 23% patate douce bio, eau de cuisson, 6% oignon bio, 4,5% lentilles corail bio, 1% huile d'olive vierge extra bio, 0,08% cumin bio

Prunes

Organic prunes 100%

FAQ

Which is healthier: Carotte patate douce lentilles corail façon dahl or Prunes?

Overall, Carotte patate douce lentilles corail façon dahl 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?

Carotte patate douce lentilles corail façon dahl has fewer calories: 55 kcal versus 71 kcal per 100 g.

Which has less sugar?

Carotte patate douce lentilles corail façon dahl has less sugar: 3.2 g versus 11.1 g per 100 g.

More comparisons