Dadlar Peacemärke vs Date Bites
Overall, Dadlar Peacemärke has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 5 of our comparison points versus 4.
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Dadlar Peacemärke | Date Bites |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | c | d |
| NOVA group | 4 | 3 |
| Calories | 320 kcal | 484 kcal |
| Fat | 3 g | 23.8 g |
| Saturated fat | 1.8 g | 1.3 g |
| Sugars | 52.3 g | 35.8 g |
| Salt | 0 g | 0 g |
| Fiber | 11.4 g | 9.2 g |
| Protein | 2.1 g | 16.1 g |
| Additives | 1 | 0 |
| Allergens | None listed | Milk, Nuts |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Dadlar Peacemärke has 34% fewer calories (320 kcal vs 484 kcal).
- Dadlar Peacemärke has 87% less fat (3 g vs 23.8 g).
- Date Bites has 28% less saturated fat (1.3 g vs 1.8 g).
- Date Bites has 32% less sugar (35.8 g vs 52.3 g).
- Dadlar Peacemärke has 19% more fiber (11.4 g vs 9.2 g).
- Date Bites has 87% more protein (16.1 g vs 2.1 g).
- Dadlar Peacemärke has the better Nutri-Score.
- Date Bites is less processed (lower NOVA group).
- Only Date Bites lists: Milk, Nuts.
Ingredients
Dadlar Peacemärke
Dates, chicory root fibre, vegetable oil (coconut, shea), strawberry powder, flavouring, acidity regulator (malic acid).
Date Bites
Dates, Almonds, Cashew Nuts, Pistachios, Ghee, Coffee Powder (2%), Honey (0.5%). ALLERGEN CAUTIONS Contains Nuts &Milk This product has been packed anintegrated nuts & dried fruits Pocessing unit and may contain an ccasional trace of other nuts or cied fruits.
FAQ
Which is healthier: Dadlar Peacemärke or Date Bites?
Overall, Dadlar Peacemärke 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?
Dadlar Peacemärke has fewer calories: 320 kcal versus 484 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Date Bites has less sugar: 35.8 g versus 52.3 g per 100 g.