Comparison
Filet de cabillaud vs Torskeporsjoner Naturell
Overall, Filet de cabillaud 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 | Filet de cabillaud | Torskeporsjoner Naturell |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | a | a |
| NOVA group | — | 1 |
| Calories | 77 kcal | 77 kcal |
| Fat | 0.6 g | 1 g |
| Saturated fat | 0.1 g | 0 g |
| Sugars | 0 g | 0 g |
| Salt | 0 g | 0.2 g |
| Fiber | 0 g | — |
| Protein | 18 g | 17 g |
| Additives | 0 | 0 |
| Allergens | None listed | Fish |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Filet de cabillaud has 40% less fat (0.6 g vs 1 g).
- Only Torskeporsjoner Naturell lists: Fish.
Ingredients
Filet de cabillaud
Not available.
Torskeporsjoner Naturell
Torskefilet (Gadus morhua).
FAQ
Which is healthier: Filet de cabillaud or Torskeporsjoner Naturell?
Overall, Filet de cabillaud 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?
Filet de cabillaud has fewer calories: 77 kcal versus 77 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Filet de cabillaud has less sugar: 0 g versus 0 g per 100 g.