Comparison

Ferrero Küsschen vs Chocolate M&M

Overall, Chocolate M&M has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 3 of our comparison points versus 2.

Nutrition per 100 g

NutrientFerrero KüsschenChocolate M&M
Nutri-Score e e
NOVA group 4 4
Calories 630 kcal 482 kcal
Fat 47.3 g 19 g
Saturated fat 19.5 g 12 g
Sugars 39.3 g 65 g
Salt 0.2 g 0.2 g
Protein 8.3 g 5.2 g
Additives110
AllergensMilk, Nuts, SoybeansMilk, Soybeans

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

Key differences

  • Chocolate M&M has 23% fewer calories (482 kcal vs 630 kcal).
  • Chocolate M&M has 60% less fat (19 g vs 47.3 g).
  • Chocolate M&M has 38% less saturated fat (12 g vs 19.5 g).
  • Ferrero Küsschen has 40% less sugar (39.3 g vs 65 g).
  • Ferrero Küsschen has 37% more protein (8.3 g vs 5.2 g).
  • Only Ferrero Küsschen lists: Nuts.

Ingredients

Ferrero Küsschen

Milchschokolade 31% (Zucker, Kakaomasse, Kakaobutter, Vollmilchpulver, Butterreinfett, Emulgator Lecithine (Soja), Vanillin), Haselnüsse (26,5%), Halbbitterschokolade (Zucker, Kakaomasse, Kakaobutter, Emulgator Lecithine (Soja), Vanillin), Palmöl, Zucker, Magermilchpulver, fettarmer Kakao, Vanillin.

Chocolate M&M

Zucker, Kakaomasse, Vollmilchpulver, Milchzucker, Kakaobutter, Stärke, Palmfett, Glukosesirup, Sheafett, Stabilisator (Gummi arabicum), Emulgator (Sojalecithin), Farbstoffe (E100, E133, E160a, E160e, E162, E170, E172), Dextrin, Überzugsmittel (Carnaubawachs), Palmkemöl, Salz, natürlicher Vanilleextrakt, Aroma.

FAQ

Which is healthier: Ferrero Küsschen or Chocolate M&M?

Overall, Chocolate M&M 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?

Chocolate M&M has fewer calories: 482 kcal versus 630 kcal per 100 g.

Which has less sugar?

Ferrero Küsschen has less sugar: 39.3 g versus 65 g per 100 g.

More comparisons