Comparison

Chi Cafe vs Jacobs Typ Matcha Latte Typ Vanilla

Overall, Chi Cafe has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 5 of our comparison points versus 1.

Nutrition per 100 g

NutrientChi CafeJacobs Typ Matcha Latte Typ...
Nutri-Score — —
NOVA group 4 4
Calories 28 kcal 408 kcal
Fat 0.1 g 6.4 g
Saturated fat 0 g 6.3 g
Sugars 3.2 g 54 g
Salt 0.3 g 1 g
Fiber — 1.4 g
Protein 3 g 8.6 g
Additives15
AllergensNone listedMilk

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

Key differences

  • Chi Cafe has 93% fewer calories (28 kcal vs 408 kcal).
  • Chi Cafe has 98% less fat (0.1 g vs 6.4 g).
  • Chi Cafe has 100% less saturated fat (0 g vs 6.3 g).
  • Chi Cafe has 94% less sugar (3.2 g vs 54 g).
  • Chi Cafe has 74% less salt (0.3 g vs 1 g).
  • Jacobs Typ Matcha Latte Typ Vanilla has 65% more protein (8.6 g vs 3 g).
  • Only Jacobs Typ Matcha Latte Typ Vanilla lists: Milk.

Ingredients

Chi Cafe

fibres d'acacia (55%), café soluble arabica (22%), dextrine de maïs (fibre soluble) 9%, extrait de guarana (4%), citrate de magnésium, extrait de café vert (2% d'arabica), poudre de cacao, lactate de calcium, arôme naturel, extrait de jus de grenade 1%, extrait de ginseng (arôme naturel)

Jacobs Typ Matcha Latte Typ Vanilla

Zucker, Magermilchpulver (21%), Glukosesirup, Maltodextrin, Palmkernöl, Matcha Pulver (3%), modifizierte Stärke, Salz, Trennmittel (E551), Milcheiweiß, Stabilisator (E340), Verdickungsmittel (E415), Emulgator (E481). Hergestellt in Tschechien. Zutaten aus der EU/Nicht-EU

FAQ

Which is healthier: Chi Cafe or Jacobs Typ Matcha Latte Typ Vanilla?

Overall, Chi Cafe 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?

Chi Cafe has fewer calories: 28 kcal versus 408 kcal per 100 g.

Which has less sugar?

Chi Cafe has less sugar: 3.2 g versus 54 g per 100 g.

More comparisons