Comparison

Dark chocolate chips vs 6111259345782

Overall, Dark chocolate chips has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 3 of our comparison points versus 1.

Nutrition per 100 g

NutrientDark chocolate chips6111259345782
Nutri-Score e e
NOVA group — —
Calories 512 kcal 564 kcal
Fat 28 g 37.4 g
Saturated fat 17 g 18.2 g
Sugars 49 g 20.5 g
Salt 0.1 g 1 g
Fiber 8.5 g —
Protein 6.5 g 3.3 g
Additives00
AllergensSoybeansNone listed

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

Key differences

  • Dark chocolate chips has 25% less fat (28 g vs 37.4 g).
  • 6111259345782 has 58% less sugar (20.5 g vs 49 g).
  • Dark chocolate chips has 94% less salt (0.1 g vs 1 g).
  • Dark chocolate chips has 50% more protein (6.5 g vs 3.3 g).
  • Only Dark chocolate chips lists: Soybeans.

Ingredients

Dark chocolate chips

Sucre, pâte de cacao, beurre de cacao cacão maigre en poudre, émulsifiant: lécithine de SOJA arome naturel. Peut contenir des traces de gluten, lait, ceuf et fruits à coque. Teneur minimum en cacao: 48%. *Cacao certifié Rainforest Alliance. Plus d'informations sur ra.org. Conditionné sous atmosphère protectrice. Conservation: Nous vous conseillons de conserver ce produit à température ambiante, au sec et à l'abri de la lumière. En cas de variation de température ce produit peut blanchir, cela n'altère en rien ses qualités nutritionnelles et gustatives. Ce blanchiment disparait à la chauffe du produit, n A R

6111259345782

Not available.

FAQ

Which is healthier: Dark chocolate chips or 6111259345782?

Overall, Dark chocolate chips 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?

Dark chocolate chips has fewer calories: 512 kcal versus 564 kcal per 100 g.

Which has less sugar?

6111259345782 has less sugar: 20.5 g versus 49 g per 100 g.

More comparisons