Cracotte chocolat vs Crousti'pause fruits rouges
Overall, Crousti'pause fruits rouges has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 5 of our comparison points versus 1.
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Cracotte chocolat | Crousti'pause fruits rouges |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | e | d |
| NOVA group | — | 4 |
| Calories | 450 kcal | 331 kcal |
| Fat | 16 g | 0 g |
| Saturated fat | 5.2 g | 0 g |
| Sugars | 31 g | 32 g |
| Salt | 0.3 g | 0.3 g |
| Protein | 7.3 g | 2.7 g |
| Additives | 0 | 4 |
| Allergens | None listed | None listed |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Crousti'pause fruits rouges has 26% fewer calories (331 kcal vs 450 kcal).
- Crousti'pause fruits rouges has no fat, while Cracotte chocolat has 16 g.
- Crousti'pause fruits rouges has no saturated fat, while Cracotte chocolat has 5.2 g.
- Cracotte chocolat has 63% more protein (7.3 g vs 2.7 g).
- Crousti'pause fruits rouges has the better Nutri-Score.
Ingredients
Cracotte chocolat
Not available.
Crousti'pause fruits rouges
Sirop de glucose-fructose, farine de riz 22,7 %, stabilisant glycérol d'origine végétale, farine de mais 7,5 %, fraise 6 % , sucre, maltodextrine, framboise 6 %, lalt écrémé en poudre, cranberry 3 %, gélifiant pectines, acidifants acides citrique et malique, correcteurs d'acidité: citrates de sodium et de calcium, arómes, jus concentré de sureau, sel marin. Fabriqué dans un ateller qui utilise des fruits à coque.
FAQ
Which is healthier: Cracotte chocolat or Crousti'pause fruits rouges?
Overall, Crousti'pause fruits rouges 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?
Crousti'pause fruits rouges has fewer calories: 331 kcal versus 450 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Cracotte chocolat has less sugar: 31 g versus 32 g per 100 g.