Dinkel Canestrelli vs CREAZIONO d'ITALIA CANESTRELLI LIGURI
Overall, Dinkel Canestrelli has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 6 of our comparison points versus 0.
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Dinkel Canestrelli | CREAZIONO d'ITALIA CANESTREL... |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | d | e |
| NOVA group | 3 | 4 |
| Calories | 483 kcal | 512 kcal |
| Fat | 24 g | 25.5 g |
| Saturated fat | 1.8 g | 16.6 g |
| Sugars | 22 g | 22.1 g |
| Salt | 0.2 g | 0.2 g |
| Fiber | 2.7 g | 2.1 g |
| Protein | 7.5 g | 6.1 g |
| Additives | 1 | 3 |
| Allergens | Nuts | Eggs, Gluten, Milk |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Dinkel Canestrelli has 89% less saturated fat (1.8 g vs 16.6 g).
- Dinkel Canestrelli has 22% more fiber (2.7 g vs 2.1 g).
- Dinkel Canestrelli has 19% more protein (7.5 g vs 6.1 g).
- Dinkel Canestrelli has the better Nutri-Score.
- Dinkel Canestrelli is less processed (lower NOVA group).
- Only Dinkel Canestrelli lists: Nuts.
- Only CREAZIONO d'ITALIA CANESTRELLI LIGURI lists: Eggs, Gluten, Milk.
Ingredients
Dinkel Canestrelli
Dinkelmehl** Type 630 (53%), Rübenzucker**, Sonnenblumenöl**, Mandeln** (5%), Zitronenöl*, Orangenöl*, Meersalz, Backtriebmittel: Natriumcarbonate. Kann Spuren von anderen Nüssen und Sesam enthalten.
CREAZIONO d'ITALIA CANESTRELLI LIGURI
farine de blé, beurre, sucre, jaune d'œuf, jus de citron, poudre à lever (diphosphates disodique E 450, carbonates de sodium E500); gousses de vanille, eau
FAQ
Which is healthier: Dinkel Canestrelli or CREAZIONO d'ITALIA CANESTRELLI LIGURI?
Overall, Dinkel Canestrelli 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?
Dinkel Canestrelli has fewer calories: 483 kcal versus 512 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Dinkel Canestrelli has less sugar: 22 g versus 22.1 g per 100 g.