Comparison

Filet de porc cuit vs Rückensteaks vom Duroc-Schwein in Canadian-Style-Marinade

Overall, Rückensteaks vom Duroc-Schwein in Canadian-Style-Marinade has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 4 of our comparison points versus 2.

Nutrition per 100 g

NutrientFilet de porc cuitRückensteaks vom Duroc-Schwe...
Nutri-Score d c
NOVA group — 4
Calories 198 kcal 180 kcal
Fat 4.7 g 10 g
Saturated fat 1.6 g 4.2 g
Sugars 20 g 0.9 g
Salt 2 g 0.5 g
Protein 19 g 21 g
Additives00
AllergensNone listedNone listed

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

Key differences

  • Filet de porc cuit has 53% less fat (4.7 g vs 10 g).
  • Filet de porc cuit has 62% less saturated fat (1.6 g vs 4.2 g).
  • Rückensteaks vom Duroc-Schwein in Canadian-Style-Marinade has 96% less sugar (0.9 g vs 20 g).
  • Rückensteaks vom Duroc-Schwein in Canadian-Style-Marinade has 75% less salt (0.5 g vs 2 g).
  • Rückensteaks vom Duroc-Schwein in Canadian-Style-Marinade has the better Nutri-Score.

Ingredients

Filet de porc cuit

Not available.

Rückensteaks vom Duroc-Schwein in Canadian-Style-Marinade

Schweinefleisch 94%, Marinade (Rapsöl, Sonnenblumenöl, Zucker, Speisesalz, Salfett, Ahornsirup, jodiertes Speisesalz (Speisesalz, Kaliumjodat), Gewürze, Kräuter, Stärke, Maltodextrin, Speisewürze, Gewürzextrakt, Aroma).

FAQ

Which is healthier: Filet de porc cuit or Rückensteaks vom Duroc-Schwein in Canadian-Style-Marinade?

Overall, Rückensteaks vom Duroc-Schwein in Canadian-Style-Marinade 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?

Rückensteaks vom Duroc-Schwein in Canadian-Style-Marinade has fewer calories: 180 kcal versus 198 kcal per 100 g.

Which has less sugar?

Rückensteaks vom Duroc-Schwein in Canadian-Style-Marinade has less sugar: 0.9 g versus 20 g per 100 g.

More comparisons