Condimento Bianco vs Kressi
Overall, Condimento Bianco has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 4 of our comparison points versus 3.
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Condimento Bianco | Kressi |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | — | — |
| NOVA group | 2 | 4 |
| Calories | 110 kcal | 25 kcal |
| Fat | 0.5 g | 0.5 g |
| Saturated fat | 0.1 g | 0.5 g |
| Sugars | 22 g | 0.5 g |
| Salt | 0 g | 3.3 g |
| Fiber | 0.5 g | 0 g |
| Protein | 0.2 g | 0.5 g |
| Additives | 0 | 3 |
| Allergens | None listed | Sulphur dioxide and sulphites |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Kressi has 77% fewer calories (25 kcal vs 110 kcal).
- Condimento Bianco has 80% less saturated fat (0.1 g vs 0.5 g).
- Kressi has 98% less sugar (0.5 g vs 22 g).
- Condimento Bianco has 100% less salt (0 g vs 3.3 g).
- Condimento Bianco has 100% more fiber (0.5 g vs 0 g).
- Kressi has 60% more protein (0.5 g vs 0.2 g).
- Condimento Bianco is less processed (lower NOVA group).
- Only Kressi lists: Sulphur dioxide and sulphites.
Ingredients
Condimento Bianco
Weißweinessig*¹ 72%, rektifiziertes Traubenmostkonzentrat*¹ 28% *aus biologischer Landwirtschaft / ¹ENTHÄLT SULFITE.
Kressi
Weissweinessig (mit sulfit), jodiertes speisesalz, gewürze (knoblauch, zwiebeln, wacholder, schwarzen pfeffer, koriander, nelken, muskatnuss), kräuter (estragon, majoran, basilikum, lorbeerblätter), geschmacksverstärker (mononatriumglutamat), antioxidationsmittel (kaliummetabisulfit). pasteurisiert. vegetabil. essigsäure: 45 g/l
FAQ
Which is healthier: Condimento Bianco or Kressi?
Overall, Condimento Bianco 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?
Kressi has fewer calories: 25 kcal versus 110 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Kressi has less sugar: 0.5 g versus 22 g per 100 g.