Comparison

Carpaccio di polpo vs Poulpe sélection cuit

Overall, Carpaccio di polpo has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 4 of our comparison points versus 3.

Nutrition per 100 g

NutrientCarpaccio di polpoPoulpe sélection cuit
Nutri-Score a c
NOVA group 4 4
Calories 126 kcal 76 kcal
Fat 5.5 g 0.8 g
Saturated fat 0.6 g 0.3 g
Sugars 0 g 0.3 g
Salt 1.4 g 2 g
Protein 18 g 16.4 g
Additives26
AllergensMolluscsMilk, Molluscs, Sulphur dioxide and sulphites

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

Key differences

  • Poulpe sélection cuit has 40% fewer calories (76 kcal vs 126 kcal).
  • Poulpe sélection cuit has 85% less fat (0.8 g vs 5.5 g).
  • Poulpe sélection cuit has 50% less saturated fat (0.3 g vs 0.6 g).
  • Carpaccio di polpo has no sugar, while Poulpe sélection cuit has 0.3 g.
  • Carpaccio di polpo has 30% less salt (1.4 g vs 2 g).
  • Carpaccio di polpo has the better Nutri-Score.
  • Only Poulpe sélection cuit lists: Milk, Sulphur dioxide and sulphites.

Ingredients

Carpaccio di polpo

53% hobotnica, 46% suncokretovo ulje, vinski ocat, kuhinjska sol, sok od limuna, peršin, prírodne I arome, regulator kiselosti: natrijevi citrati; konzervans: kalijev sorbat. Može sadržavati tragove rakova, ribe, soje, jaja i glutena.

Poulpe sélection cuit

_Poulpe_ cuit (Octopus Vulgaris), sel, amidon de riz, protéine de _lait_, stabilisant : (E451, E452 et E415), antioxydant : (E316, E331 et E224 (_SULFITES_)).

FAQ

Which is healthier: Carpaccio di polpo or Poulpe sélection cuit?

Overall, Carpaccio di polpo 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?

Poulpe sélection cuit has fewer calories: 76 kcal versus 126 kcal per 100 g.

Which has less sugar?

Carpaccio di polpo has less sugar: 0 g versus 0.3 g per 100 g.

More comparisons