Comparison

Creme mit Aceto Balsamico di Modena IGP - Himbeere vs Boule de vinaigre balsamique

Overall, Creme mit Aceto Balsamico di Modena IGP - Himbeere has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 2 of our comparison points versus 1.

Nutrition per 100 g

NutrientCreme mit Aceto Balsamico di...Boule de vinaigre balsamique
Nutri-Score — —
NOVA group 4 4
Calories 203 kcal 248 kcal
Fat 0.5 g 0 g
Saturated fat 0.1 g 0 g
Sugars 33 g 42.3 g
Salt 0 g 0.1 g
Fiber 0.5 g —
Protein 0.8 g 0.6 g
Additives11
AllergensNone listedNone listed

Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).

Key differences

  • Creme mit Aceto Balsamico di Modena IGP - Himbeere has 18% fewer calories (203 kcal vs 248 kcal).
  • Boule de vinaigre balsamique has no fat, while Creme mit Aceto Balsamico di Modena IGP - Himbeere has 0.5 g.
  • Creme mit Aceto Balsamico di Modena IGP - Himbeere has 22% less sugar (33 g vs 42.3 g).

Ingredients

Creme mit Aceto Balsamico di Modena IGP - Himbeere

„Aceto Balsamico di Modena I.G.P." 60% (Weinessig (enthält Sulfite), konzentrierter Traubenmost), gekochter Traubenmost, Glukosesirup, Himbeersaft 6% (aus konzentriertem Saft), modifizierte Stärke, natürliches Aroma.

Boule de vinaigre balsamique

Vinaigre balsamique de Modène 93% (moût de raisin cuit, vinaigre de vin), épaississant naturel: agar-agar.

FAQ

Which is healthier: Creme mit Aceto Balsamico di Modena IGP - Himbeere or Boule de vinaigre balsamique?

Overall, Creme mit Aceto Balsamico di Modena IGP - Himbeere 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?

Creme mit Aceto Balsamico di Modena IGP - Himbeere has fewer calories: 203 kcal versus 248 kcal per 100 g.

Which has less sugar?

Creme mit Aceto Balsamico di Modena IGP - Himbeere has less sugar: 33 g versus 42.3 g per 100 g.

More comparisons