Fita crackers 30g vs Ricanela
Overall, Ricanela 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 | Fita crackers 30g | Ricanela |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | e | e |
| NOVA group | 3 | — |
| Calories | 487 kcal | 482 kcal |
| Fat | 20 g | 20 g |
| Saturated fat | 13.3 g | 7.6 g |
| Sugars | 23.3 g | 25 g |
| Salt | 1.3 g | 0 g |
| Fiber | 0 g | 2 g |
| Protein | 6.7 g | 5.5 g |
| Additives | 7 | 0 |
| Allergens | Gluten, Milk | None listed |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Ricanela has 43% less saturated fat (7.6 g vs 13.3 g).
- Ricanela has no salt, while Fita crackers 30g has 1.3 g.
- Ricanela has 100% more fiber (2 g vs 0 g).
- Fita crackers 30g has 18% more protein (6.7 g vs 5.5 g).
- Only Fita crackers 30g lists: Gluten, Milk.
Ingredients
Fita crackers 30g
Flour, coconut oil, vegetable shortening, palm oil, vitamin E, sugar, raising agents (ammonium bicarbonate, sodium bicarbonate, monocalcium phosphate), salt, malt extract, enzymes (protease).
Ricanela
Not available.
FAQ
Which is healthier: Fita crackers 30g or Ricanela?
Overall, Ricanela 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?
Ricanela has fewer calories: 482 kcal versus 487 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Fita crackers 30g has less sugar: 23.3 g versus 25 g per 100 g.