Comparison
Entrecôte vs Riesling Trocken
Overall, Riesling Trocken has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 1 of our comparison points versus 0.
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Entrecôte | Riesling Trocken |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | — | — |
| NOVA group | 3 | — |
| Calories | 11 kcal | 6 kcal |
| Fat | 0 g | 0 g |
| Saturated fat | 0 g | 0 g |
| Sugars | 0.6 g | 0.9 g |
| Salt | 0 g | 0 g |
| Fiber | 0 g | 0 g |
| Protein | 0.1 g | 0 g |
| Additives | 0 | 0 |
| Allergens | None listed | Sulphur dioxide and sulphites |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Riesling Trocken has 45% fewer calories (6 kcal vs 11 kcal).
- Only Riesling Trocken lists: Sulphur dioxide and sulphites.
Ingredients
Entrecôte
Rotwein
Riesling Trocken
Not available.
FAQ
Which is healthier: Entrecôte or Riesling Trocken?
Overall, Riesling Trocken 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?
Riesling Trocken has fewer calories: 6 kcal versus 11 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Entrecôte has less sugar: 0.6 g versus 0.9 g per 100 g.