Comparison
Froot loops vs Kuzu
Overall, Kuzu has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 4 of our comparison points versus 2.
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Froot loops | Kuzu |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | c | c |
| NOVA group | 2 | — |
| Calories | 21 kcal | 342 kcal |
| Fat | 1 g | 0.2 g |
| Saturated fat | 0.5 g | 0 g |
| Sugars | 12 g | 0.2 g |
| Salt | 0.4 g | 0.1 g |
| Protein | 2 g | 0.3 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
- Froot loops has 94% fewer calories (21 kcal vs 342 kcal).
- Kuzu has 80% less fat (0.2 g vs 1 g).
- Kuzu has no saturated fat, while Froot loops has 0.5 g.
- Kuzu has 98% less sugar (0.2 g vs 12 g).
- Kuzu has 88% less salt (0.1 g vs 0.4 g).
- Froot loops has 85% more protein (2 g vs 0.3 g).
Ingredients
Froot loops
Not available.
Kuzu
raiz de Kuzu de agricultura ecológlca.
FAQ
Which is healthier: Froot loops or Kuzu?
Overall, Kuzu 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?
Froot loops has fewer calories: 21 kcal versus 342 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Kuzu has less sugar: 0.2 g versus 12 g per 100 g.