Confit de figues vs Confit de figues au vinaigre de vin rouge
Overall, Confit de figues au vinaigre de vin rouge has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 3 of our comparison points versus 0.
Confit de figues
Confit de figues au vinaigre de vin rouge
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Confit de figues | Confit de figues au vinaigre... |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | d | d |
| NOVA group | 4 | — |
| Calories | 228 kcal | 188 kcal |
| Fat | 0.5 g | 0.6 g |
| Saturated fat | 0.1 g | 0.2 g |
| Sugars | 52 g | 38.6 g |
| Salt | 0.3 g | 0.5 g |
| Fiber | 2.9 g | 4.2 g |
| Protein | 1 g | 0.8 g |
| Additives | 1 | 0 |
| 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
- Confit de figues au vinaigre de vin rouge has 18% fewer calories (188 kcal vs 228 kcal).
- Confit de figues au vinaigre de vin rouge has 26% less sugar (38.6 g vs 52 g).
- Confit de figues au vinaigre de vin rouge has 30% more fiber (4.2 g vs 2.9 g).
- Only Confit de figues au vinaigre de vin rouge lists: Sulphur dioxide and sulphites.
Ingredients
Confit de figues
65% figues, sucre de canne, 1,1% vinaigre de vin rouge, gélifiant: pectines; jus de citron concentré, poivre.
Confit de figues au vinaigre de vin rouge
68%figue,sucre,3,7% vinaigre de vin rouge,(sulfites),jus de citron concentré,sel,gélifiant :pectine,poivre blanc.
FAQ
Which is healthier: Confit de figues or Confit de figues au vinaigre de vin rouge?
Overall, Confit de figues au vinaigre de vin rouge 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?
Confit de figues au vinaigre de vin rouge has fewer calories: 188 kcal versus 228 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Confit de figues au vinaigre de vin rouge has less sugar: 38.6 g versus 52 g per 100 g.