Coconut Milk kókusz tej vs Boisson à base de noix de coco
Overall, Boisson à base de noix de coco has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 6 of our comparison points versus 2.
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Coconut Milk kókusz tej | Boisson à base de noix de co... |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | e | b |
| NOVA group | 1 | 4 |
| Calories | 207 kcal | 18 kcal |
| Fat | 21 g | 1.4 g |
| Saturated fat | 18.6 g | 1.3 g |
| Sugars | 2.1 g | 0.5 g |
| Salt | 0 g | 0.1 g |
| Fiber | 0.9 g | — |
| Protein | 1.8 g | 0.6 g |
| Additives | 0 | 2 |
| Allergens | None listed | None listed |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Boisson à base de noix de coco has 91% fewer calories (18 kcal vs 207 kcal).
- Boisson à base de noix de coco has 93% less fat (1.4 g vs 21 g).
- Boisson à base de noix de coco has 93% less saturated fat (1.3 g vs 18.6 g).
- Boisson à base de noix de coco has 76% less sugar (0.5 g vs 2.1 g).
- Coconut Milk kókusz tej has 67% more protein (1.8 g vs 0.6 g).
- Boisson à base de noix de coco has the better Nutri-Score.
- Coconut Milk kókusz tej is less processed (lower NOVA group).
Ingredients
Coconut Milk kókusz tej
91% coconut extract, water, guar gum stabilizer,
Boisson à base de noix de coco
eau, noix de coco* 4,8 % , amidon de riz*, arôme naturel de coco*, sel marin, stabilisants: gomme guar*, gomme xanthane *Ingrédients issus de l'Agriculture Biologique.
FAQ
Which is healthier: Coconut Milk kókusz tej or Boisson à base de noix de coco?
Overall, Boisson à base de noix de coco 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?
Boisson à base de noix de coco has fewer calories: 18 kcal versus 207 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Boisson à base de noix de coco has less sugar: 0.5 g versus 2.1 g per 100 g.