Comparison
Filet de Saxe vs Filet de Saxe
Overall, Filet de Saxe has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 3 of our comparison points versus 0.
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Filet de Saxe | Filet de Saxe |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | d | d |
| NOVA group | — | 3 |
| Calories | 110 kcal | 116 kcal |
| Fat | 1.5 g | 1.3 g |
| Saturated fat | 0.6 g | 0.5 g |
| Sugars | 0.9 g | 0.5 g |
| Salt | 3.4 g | 2.7 g |
| Protein | 22 g | 26 g |
| Additives | 0 | 1 |
| Allergens | None listed | None listed |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Filet de Saxe has 44% less sugar (0.5 g vs 0.9 g).
- Filet de Saxe has 21% less salt (2.7 g vs 3.4 g).
- Filet de Saxe has 15% more protein (26 g vs 22 g).
Ingredients
Filet de Saxe
Not available.
Filet de Saxe
97 4 % viande de porc. sel, conservateur E250)
FAQ
Which is healthier: Filet de Saxe or Filet de Saxe?
Overall, Filet de Saxe 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 Saxe has fewer calories: 110 kcal versus 116 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Filet de Saxe has less sugar: 0.5 g versus 0.9 g per 100 g.