Chicken Karaage vs Karaage Chicken Battered Fried Chicken Leg Meat
Overall, Karaage Chicken Battered Fried Chicken Leg Meat has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 7 of our comparison points versus 0.
Chicken Karaage
Karaage Chicken Battered Fried Chicken Leg Meat
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Chicken Karaage | Karaage Chicken Battered Fri... |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | d | c |
| NOVA group | — | — |
| Calories | 252 kcal | 167 kcal |
| Fat | 14.8 g | 8.3 g |
| Saturated fat | 2.2 g | 1.8 g |
| Sugars | 2.2 g | 1.2 g |
| Salt | 1.4 g | 1.2 g |
| Fiber | 0 g | 0 g |
| Protein | 11.1 g | 13.1 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
- Karaage Chicken Battered Fried Chicken Leg Meat has 34% fewer calories (167 kcal vs 252 kcal).
- Karaage Chicken Battered Fried Chicken Leg Meat has 44% less fat (8.3 g vs 14.8 g).
- Karaage Chicken Battered Fried Chicken Leg Meat has 19% less saturated fat (1.8 g vs 2.2 g).
- Karaage Chicken Battered Fried Chicken Leg Meat has 46% less sugar (1.2 g vs 2.2 g).
- Karaage Chicken Battered Fried Chicken Leg Meat has 15% more protein (13.1 g vs 11.1 g).
- Karaage Chicken Battered Fried Chicken Leg Meat has the better Nutri-Score.
Ingredients
Chicken Karaage
Not available.
Karaage Chicken Battered Fried Chicken Leg Meat
Not available.
FAQ
Which is healthier: Chicken Karaage or Karaage Chicken Battered Fried Chicken Leg Meat?
Overall, Karaage Chicken Battered Fried Chicken Leg Meat 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?
Karaage Chicken Battered Fried Chicken Leg Meat has fewer calories: 167 kcal versus 252 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Karaage Chicken Battered Fried Chicken Leg Meat has less sugar: 1.2 g versus 2.2 g per 100 g.