Excellence Milk Sea Salt Caramel vs Milka Caramel
Overall, Milka Caramel has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 2 of our comparison points versus 1.
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Excellence Milk Sea Salt Car... | Milka Caramel |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | e | e |
| NOVA group | 4 | 4 |
| Calories | 550 kcal | 545 kcal |
| Fat | 32 g | 33.5 g |
| Saturated fat | 20 g | 19 g |
| Sugars | 57 g | 50 g |
| Salt | 0.6 g | 0.3 g |
| Fiber | — | 1 g |
| Protein | 5.4 g | 4.5 g |
| Additives | 2 | 3 |
| Allergens | Milk, Soybeans | Milk, Nuts, Soybeans |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Milka Caramel has 12% less sugar (50 g vs 57 g).
- Milka Caramel has 58% less salt (0.3 g vs 0.6 g).
- Excellence Milk Sea Salt Caramel has 17% more protein (5.4 g vs 4.5 g).
- Only Milka Caramel lists: Nuts.
Ingredients
Excellence Milk Sea Salt Caramel
sugar, cocoa butter, caramel seeds (sugar, lactose, concentrated dairy butter, skim milk powder, emulsifier (rapeseed lecithin)) 15%, milk powder, cocoa paste, lactose condensed milk butter, skim milk powder extracted from barley malt, salt flower 0,3%, emulsifier (lecithin), aroma, may contain sesame seeds and nuts, cocoa: 30% minimum ,
Milka Caramel
Sucre, huile de palme, beurre de cacao, LAIT écrémé en poudre, sirop de glucose, pâte de cacao, lactosérum en poudre (de LAIT), BEURRE concentré, sirop de glucose-fructose, émulsifiants (lécithines de SOJA, E471), pâte de NOISETTE, arômes, sel.
FAQ
Which is healthier: Excellence Milk Sea Salt Caramel or Milka Caramel?
Overall, Milka Caramel 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?
Milka Caramel has fewer calories: 545 kcal versus 550 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Milka Caramel has less sugar: 50 g versus 57 g per 100 g.