Comparison

Chrupki kukurydziane w polewie mlecznej Stema vs Jumbo's Confiture Abrikoos Passievrucht 330g

Overall, Jumbo's Confiture Abrikoos Passievrucht 330g has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 5 of our comparison points versus 1.

Nutrition per 100 g

NutrientChrupki kukurydziane w polew...Jumbo's Confiture Abrikoos P...
Nutri-Score e d
NOVA group — 4
Calories 557 kcal 225 kcal
Fat 34.8 g 0.1 g
Saturated fat 33 g 0 g
Sugars 45.8 g 49.3 g
Salt 0.2 g 0.1 g
Fiber — 1.3 g
Protein 4.6 g 0.6 g
Additives02
AllergensNone listedNone listed

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

Key differences

  • Jumbo's Confiture Abrikoos Passievrucht 330g has 60% fewer calories (225 kcal vs 557 kcal).
  • Jumbo's Confiture Abrikoos Passievrucht 330g has 100% less fat (0.1 g vs 34.8 g).
  • Jumbo's Confiture Abrikoos Passievrucht 330g has no saturated fat, while Chrupki kukurydziane w polewie mlecznej Stema has 33 g.
  • Chrupki kukurydziane w polewie mlecznej Stema has 87% more protein (4.6 g vs 0.6 g).
  • Jumbo's Confiture Abrikoos Passievrucht 330g has the better Nutri-Score.

Ingredients

Chrupki kukurydziane w polewie mlecznej Stema

Not available.

Jumbo's Confiture Abrikoos Passievrucht 330g

Abrikozen, suiker, glucose-fructosestroop, passievruchtenpuree, geleermiddel: pectinen, zuurteregelaar: citroenzuur

FAQ

Which is healthier: Chrupki kukurydziane w polewie mlecznej Stema or Jumbo's Confiture Abrikoos Passievrucht 330g?

Overall, Jumbo's Confiture Abrikoos Passievrucht 330g 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?

Jumbo's Confiture Abrikoos Passievrucht 330g has fewer calories: 225 kcal versus 557 kcal per 100 g.

Which has less sugar?

Chrupki kukurydziane w polewie mlecznej Stema has less sugar: 45.8 g versus 49.3 g per 100 g.

More comparisons