Charal bifteck x6 600g format vs Iris thin cut beef steaks
Overall, Charal bifteck x6 600g format has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 5 of our comparison points versus 0.
Charal bifteck x6 600g format
Iris thin cut beef steaks
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Charal bifteck x6 600g forma... | Iris thin cut beef steaks |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | a | c |
| NOVA group | — | — |
| Calories | 115 kcal | 150 kcal |
| Fat | 2.3 g | 7.2 g |
| Saturated fat | 0.8 g | 3.1 g |
| Sugars | 0 g | 0 g |
| Salt | 0.1 g | 0.3 g |
| Fiber | 0 g | 0 g |
| Protein | 23 g | 21.2 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
- Charal bifteck x6 600g format has 23% fewer calories (115 kcal vs 150 kcal).
- Charal bifteck x6 600g format has 68% less fat (2.3 g vs 7.2 g).
- Charal bifteck x6 600g format has 74% less saturated fat (0.8 g vs 3.1 g).
- Charal bifteck x6 600g format has the better Nutri-Score.
Ingredients
Charal bifteck x6 600g format
* AQR : apports quotidiens de reference our un adulte-type kJ /
Iris thin cut beef steaks
Thin cut beef steaks
FAQ
Which is healthier: Charal bifteck x6 600g format or Iris thin cut beef steaks?
Overall, Charal bifteck x6 600g format 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?
Charal bifteck x6 600g format has fewer calories: 115 kcal versus 150 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Charal bifteck x6 600g format has less sugar: 0 g versus 0 g per 100 g.