Comparison
Côtes de Blettes coupées vs Acelga en tarro
Overall, Côtes de Blettes coupées has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 4 of our comparison points versus 1.
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Côtes de Blettes coupées | Acelga en tarro |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | a | a |
| NOVA group | 1 | 3 |
| Calories | 22 kcal | 14 kcal |
| Fat | 0 g | 0.1 g |
| Saturated fat | 0 g | 0 g |
| Sugars | 0.7 g | 0.5 g |
| Salt | 0.4 g | 0.8 g |
| Fiber | 2.4 g | 1.6 g |
| Protein | 2.2 g | 0.8 g |
| Additives | 0 | 0 |
| Allergens | None listed | None listed |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Acelga en tarro has 36% fewer calories (14 kcal vs 22 kcal).
- Côtes de Blettes coupées has 56% less salt (0.4 g vs 0.8 g).
- Côtes de Blettes coupées has 33% more fiber (2.4 g vs 1.6 g).
- Côtes de Blettes coupées has 64% more protein (2.2 g vs 0.8 g).
- Côtes de Blettes coupées is less processed (lower NOVA group).
Ingredients
Côtes de Blettes coupées
Côtes de blettes
Acelga en tarro
Acelga, agua, sal y antioxidante (ácido ascórbico).
FAQ
Which is healthier: Côtes de Blettes coupées or Acelga en tarro?
Overall, Côtes de Blettes coupées 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?
Acelga en tarro has fewer calories: 14 kcal versus 22 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Acelga en tarro has less sugar: 0.5 g versus 0.7 g per 100 g.