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 2.
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Filet de Saxe | Filet de Saxe |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | d | d |
| NOVA group | 3 | — |
| Calories | 116 kcal | 96 kcal |
| Fat | 1.3 g | 1.8 g |
| Saturated fat | 0.5 g | 0.7 g |
| Sugars | 0.5 g | 0 g |
| Salt | 2.7 g | 3.3 g |
| Protein | 26 g | 20 g |
| Additives | 1 | 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% fewer calories (96 kcal vs 116 kcal).
- Filet de Saxe has 28% less fat (1.3 g vs 1.8 g).
- Filet de Saxe has no sugar, while Filet de Saxe has 0.5 g.
- Filet de Saxe has 18% less salt (2.7 g vs 3.3 g).
- Filet de Saxe has 23% more protein (26 g vs 20 g).
Ingredients
Filet de Saxe
97 4 % viande de porc. sel, conservateur E250)
Filet de Saxe
Not available.
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: 96 kcal versus 116 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Filet de Saxe has less sugar: 0 g versus 0.5 g per 100 g.