Comparison

Dés de dinde cuits vs Lardon de dinde fumés hala IQF précuits

Overall, Dés de dinde cuits has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 7 of our comparison points versus 0.

Nutrition per 100 g

NutrientDés de dinde cuitsLardon de dinde fumés hala I...
Nutri-Score b d
NOVA group 4 4
Calories 107 kcal 112 kcal
Fat 3.3 g 4 g
Saturated fat 0.8 g 1.3 g
Sugars 2.8 g 4 g
Salt 1.5 g 2.3 g
Fiber 1.4 g —
Protein 15 g 13 g
Additives47
AllergensGlutenNone listed

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

Key differences

  • Dés de dinde cuits has 18% less fat (3.3 g vs 4 g).
  • Dés de dinde cuits has 38% less saturated fat (0.8 g vs 1.3 g).
  • Dés de dinde cuits has 30% less sugar (2.8 g vs 4 g).
  • Dés de dinde cuits has 35% less salt (1.5 g vs 2.3 g).
  • Dés de dinde cuits has 13% more protein (15 g vs 13 g).
  • Dés de dinde cuits has the better Nutri-Score.
  • Only Dés de dinde cuits lists: Gluten.

Ingredients

Dés de dinde cuits

Viande de cuisse de dinde origine France: 73% dextrose de blé, acidifiant : lactate de potassium, fibre de blé, gélifiant : carraghénanes, sel, conservateur: nitrite de sodium, arôme naturel, antioxydant: ascorbate de sodium. eau,

Lardon de dinde fumés hala IQF précuits

Dinde Halal (60%), eau, amidon de pomme de terre, sel, sirop de glucose, dextrose, épices, arome, arôme de fumée. Stabilisant (E451), gélifiant (E407a, E407), conservateur (E250, E262), antioxydant (E301, E331).

FAQ

Which is healthier: Dés de dinde cuits or Lardon de dinde fumés hala IQF précuits?

Overall, Dés de dinde cuits 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?

Dés de dinde cuits has fewer calories: 107 kcal versus 112 kcal per 100 g.

Which has less sugar?

Dés de dinde cuits has less sugar: 2.8 g versus 4 g per 100 g.

More comparisons