Comparison
Filet de Saxe vs Filet de saxe bio
Overall, Filet de saxe bio has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 3 of our comparison points versus 1.
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Filet de Saxe | Filet de saxe bio |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | d | d |
| NOVA group | — | — |
| Calories | 110 kcal | 121 kcal |
| Fat | 1.5 g | 1.8 g |
| Saturated fat | 0.6 g | 0.3 g |
| Sugars | 0.9 g | 0.8 g |
| Salt | 3.4 g | 3 g |
| Protein | 22 g | 25 g |
| Additives | 0 | 0 |
| 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 17% less fat (1.5 g vs 1.8 g).
- Filet de saxe bio has 50% less saturated fat (0.3 g vs 0.6 g).
- Filet de saxe bio has 12% less salt (3 g vs 3.4 g).
- Filet de saxe bio has 12% more protein (25 g vs 22 g).
Ingredients
Filet de Saxe
Not available.
Filet de saxe bio
Not available.
FAQ
Which is healthier: Filet de Saxe or Filet de saxe bio?
Overall, Filet de saxe bio 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 121 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Filet de saxe bio has less sugar: 0.8 g versus 0.9 g per 100 g.