Fish Cuisine Italiano vs Vissticks
Overall, Fish Cuisine Italiano has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 4 of our comparison points versus 3.
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Fish Cuisine Italiano | Vissticks |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | a | b |
| NOVA group | 3 | 3 |
| Calories | 78 kcal | 190 kcal |
| Fat | 2.4 g | 9 g |
| Saturated fat | 1 g | 0.8 g |
| Sugars | 1.2 g | 0.8 g |
| Salt | 0.9 g | 0.8 g |
| Fiber | 0.5 g | 0.8 g |
| Protein | 11 g | 13 g |
| Additives | 0 | 0 |
| Allergens | Fish, Milk | Fish, Gluten |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Fish Cuisine Italiano has 59% fewer calories (78 kcal vs 190 kcal).
- Fish Cuisine Italiano has 73% less fat (2.4 g vs 9 g).
- Vissticks has 33% less sugar (0.8 g vs 1.2 g).
- Vissticks has 38% more fiber (0.8 g vs 0.5 g).
- Vissticks has 15% more protein (13 g vs 11 g).
- Fish Cuisine Italiano has the better Nutri-Score.
- Only Fish Cuisine Italiano lists: Milk.
- Only Vissticks lists: Gluten.
Ingredients
Fish Cuisine Italiano
Alaska koolvis 41%, tomaten 23%, uien, paprika 5,4%, kwarkbereiding 4,9% (kwark (melk), magere yoghurt (melk)), water, Edammer kaas (melk), mozzarella (melk) 2,0%, zetmeel (rijst. aardappel), koolzaadolie, zout, kruiden (basilicum 0,45%), knoflook, yoghurtpoeder (melk), specerijen, uienpoeder. Ondanks zorgvuldig fileren kan onbedoeld een graatje in de vis achterblijven.
Vissticks
65% koolvis, tarwebloem, raapolie, water, aardappelzetmeel, zout, gist, specerijen,
FAQ
Which is healthier: Fish Cuisine Italiano or Vissticks?
Overall, Fish Cuisine Italiano 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?
Fish Cuisine Italiano has fewer calories: 78 kcal versus 190 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Vissticks has less sugar: 0.8 g versus 1.2 g per 100 g.