Comparison

Chrzan tarty vs Chrzan Staropolski 190G. Motyl

Overall, Chrzan Staropolski 190G. Motyl has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 3 of our comparison points versus 2.

Nutrition per 100 g

NutrientChrzan tartyChrzan Staropolski 190G. Mot...
Nutri-Score c c
NOVA group 4 4
Calories 127 kcal 147 kcal
Fat 8.1 g 6.4 g
Saturated fat 1 g 0.5 g
Sugars 6.5 g 9 g
Salt 1.1 g 0.9 g
Fiber 4.1 g 4.1 g
Protein 2.1 g 3 g
Additives43
AllergensMilk, Mustard, Sulphur dioxide and sulphitesMilk, Mustard, Sulphur dioxide and sulphites

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

Key differences

  • Chrzan tarty has 14% fewer calories (127 kcal vs 147 kcal).
  • Chrzan Staropolski 190G. Motyl has 21% less fat (6.4 g vs 8.1 g).
  • Chrzan Staropolski 190G. Motyl has 50% less saturated fat (0.5 g vs 1 g).
  • Chrzan tarty has 28% less sugar (6.5 g vs 9 g).
  • Chrzan Staropolski 190G. Motyl has 30% more protein (3 g vs 2.1 g).

Ingredients

Chrzan tarty

Korzeń chrzanu 54%, woda, cukier, ocet spirytusowy, olej rzepakowy, sól, regulator kwasowości (kwas cytrynowy), substancja zagęszczająca (guma ksantanowa), _mleko_ w proszku, substancja konserwująca pirosiarczyn sodu (zawiera _dwutlenek siarki_).

Chrzan Staropolski 190G. Motyl

54% korzeń chrzanu, woda, olej rzepakowy, ocet spirytusowy, cukier, sól, _mleko_ w proszku pełne, regulator kwasowości (kwas cytrynowy), substancje zagęszczające (guma ksantanowa, guma guar), słodka serwatka w proszku.

FAQ

Which is healthier: Chrzan tarty or Chrzan Staropolski 190G. Motyl?

Overall, Chrzan Staropolski 190G. Motyl 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?

Chrzan tarty has fewer calories: 127 kcal versus 147 kcal per 100 g.

Which has less sugar?

Chrzan tarty has less sugar: 6.5 g versus 9 g per 100 g.

More comparisons