Comparison

Flusskrebssalat vs Écrevisses de Louisiane

Overall, Écrevisses de Louisiane has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 7 of our comparison points versus 1.

Nutrition per 100 g

NutrientFlusskrebssalatÉcrevisses de Louisiane
Nutri-Score d c
NOVA group 4 —
Calories 343 kcal 91 kcal
Fat 32 g 0.9 g
Saturated fat 2.5 g 0.3 g
Sugars 7.2 g 0 g
Salt 0.9 g 1.9 g
Protein 5.8 g 19 g
Additives50
AllergensCrustaceans, Eggs, MustardNone listed

Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).

Key differences

  • Écrevisses de Louisiane has 73% fewer calories (91 kcal vs 343 kcal).
  • Écrevisses de Louisiane has 97% less fat (0.9 g vs 32 g).
  • Écrevisses de Louisiane has 88% less saturated fat (0.3 g vs 2.5 g).
  • Écrevisses de Louisiane has no sugar, while Flusskrebssalat has 7.2 g.
  • Flusskrebssalat has 54% less salt (0.9 g vs 1.9 g).
  • Écrevisses de Louisiane has 69% more protein (19 g vs 5.8 g).
  • Écrevisses de Louisiane has the better Nutri-Score.
  • Only Flusskrebssalat lists: Crustaceans, Eggs, Mustard.

Ingredients

Flusskrebssalat

Louisiana-Flusskrebsfleisch (Procambarus clarki) 35%, Rapsöl, Äpfel, Porree, Zucker, Eigelb, Knoblauch, Tomatenmark, Kräuter, Gewürze, Speisesalz, Senfsaat, Branntweinessig, Säuerungsmittel: Citronensäure, Essigsäure; Säureregulator: Natriumacetate; Traubenzucker, Maltodextrine, Verdickungsmittel: Guarkernmehl, Xanthan; Aroma.

Écrevisses de Louisiane

Not available.

FAQ

Which is healthier: Flusskrebssalat or Écrevisses de Louisiane?

Overall, Écrevisses de Louisiane 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?

Écrevisses de Louisiane has fewer calories: 91 kcal versus 343 kcal per 100 g.

Which has less sugar?

Écrevisses de Louisiane has less sugar: 0 g versus 7.2 g per 100 g.

More comparisons