Comparison

Chouchou reunion cubes bio surgeles iqf vs Pate de gingembre 90g ceb

Overall, Chouchou reunion cubes bio surgeles iqf has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 6 of our comparison points versus 2.

Nutrition per 100 g

NutrientChouchou reunion cubes bio s...Pate de gingembre 90g ceb
Nutri-Score a e
NOVA group 1 3
Calories 22 kcal 27 kcal
Fat 0.5 g 0.9 g
Saturated fat 0.1 g 0.1 g
Sugars 2.8 g 0.8 g
Salt 0 g 6 g
Fiber 1.4 g —
Protein 0.6 g 0.9 g
Additives01
AllergensNone listedDioxyde de soufre et sulfites

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

Key differences

  • Chouchou reunion cubes bio surgeles iqf has 19% fewer calories (22 kcal vs 27 kcal).
  • Chouchou reunion cubes bio surgeles iqf has 44% less fat (0.5 g vs 0.9 g).
  • Pate de gingembre 90g ceb has 71% less sugar (0.8 g vs 2.8 g).
  • Chouchou reunion cubes bio surgeles iqf has 100% less salt (0 g vs 6 g).
  • Pate de gingembre 90g ceb has 33% more protein (0.9 g vs 0.6 g).
  • Chouchou reunion cubes bio surgeles iqf has the better Nutri-Score.
  • Chouchou reunion cubes bio surgeles iqf is less processed (lower NOVA group).
  • Only Pate de gingembre 90g ceb lists: Dioxyde de soufre et sulfites.

Ingredients

Chouchou reunion cubes bio surgeles iqf

Chouchou (100%) issus de l'agriculture biologique.

Pate de gingembre 90g ceb

Gingembre (81,9%), eau, sel, acidifiant : acide citrique.

FAQ

Which is healthier: Chouchou reunion cubes bio surgeles iqf or Pate de gingembre 90g ceb?

Overall, Chouchou reunion cubes bio surgeles iqf 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?

Chouchou reunion cubes bio surgeles iqf has fewer calories: 22 kcal versus 27 kcal per 100 g.

Which has less sugar?

Pate de gingembre 90g ceb has less sugar: 0.8 g versus 2.8 g per 100 g.

More comparisons