Filet de panga vs Pangasius Filet
Overall, Pangasius Filet 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 | Filet de panga | Pangasius Filet |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | a | a |
| NOVA group | 4 | — |
| Calories | 50 kcal | 77 kcal |
| Fat | 0.8 g | 1 g |
| Saturated fat | 0.3 g | 0 g |
| Sugars | 0 g | 0 g |
| Salt | 0.4 g | 0.1 g |
| Fiber | 0 g | — |
| Protein | 10 g | 17 g |
| Additives | 5 | 0 |
| Allergens | Fish | None listed |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Filet de panga has 35% fewer calories (50 kcal vs 77 kcal).
- Pangasius Filet has 86% less salt (0.1 g vs 0.4 g).
- Pangasius Filet has 41% more protein (17 g vs 10 g).
- Only Filet de panga lists: Fish.
Ingredients
Filet de panga
FILETS DE PANGA avec eau ajoutée CONGELES SANS PEAU SANS ARETES INGREDIENTS PANGA, EAU 10%, SEL , STABILISANT (E451. E452), ANTI-OXYDANT (E330, E331, E332) ALLERGENES: POISSON
Pangasius Filet
Not available.
FAQ
Which is healthier: Filet de panga or Pangasius Filet?
Overall, Pangasius Filet 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 panga has fewer calories: 50 kcal versus 77 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Filet de panga has less sugar: 0 g versus 0 g per 100 g.