Cioccolato fondente vs LINDT EXCELLENCE Smooth Dark 78%
Overall, Cioccolato fondente has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 3 of our comparison points versus 2.
Cioccolato fondente
LINDT EXCELLENCE Smooth Dark 78%
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Cioccolato fondente | LINDT EXCELLENCE Smooth Dark... |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | e | e |
| NOVA group | 4 | — |
| Calories | 545 kcal | 576 kcal |
| Fat | 40 g | 46 g |
| Saturated fat | 24.8 g | 29 g |
| Sugars | 27.2 g | 17 g |
| Salt | 0 g | 0.1 g |
| Fiber | 11.7 g | 0 g |
| Protein | 8.4 g | 10 g |
| Additives | 1 | 0 |
| Allergens | Soybeans | Milk, Buttereinfett |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Cioccolato fondente has 13% less fat (40 g vs 46 g).
- Cioccolato fondente has 14% less saturated fat (24.8 g vs 29 g).
- LINDT EXCELLENCE Smooth Dark 78% has 38% less sugar (17 g vs 27.2 g).
- Cioccolato fondente has 100% more fiber (11.7 g vs 0 g).
- LINDT EXCELLENCE Smooth Dark 78% has 16% more protein (10 g vs 8.4 g).
- Only Cioccolato fondente lists: Soybeans.
- Only LINDT EXCELLENCE Smooth Dark 78% lists: Milk, Buttereinfett.
Ingredients
Cioccolato fondente
Massa di cacao, zucchero, burro di cacao, emulsionante: lecitine (soia); estratto di vaniglia
LINDT EXCELLENCE Smooth Dark 78%
Kakao 78% mindesten kakaomasse, kakaobutter, Zucker, stark entölter Kakao, Buttereinfett. kann Schalenfrüchte, soja, sesamsamen, Weizen enthalten
FAQ
Which is healthier: Cioccolato fondente or LINDT EXCELLENCE Smooth Dark 78%?
Overall, Cioccolato fondente 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?
Cioccolato fondente has fewer calories: 545 kcal versus 576 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
LINDT EXCELLENCE Smooth Dark 78% has less sugar: 17 g versus 27.2 g per 100 g.