Comparison

Gemma di Riso, Cocco vs Rýžová kaše meruňka

Overall, Rýžová kaše meruňka has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 7 of our comparison points versus 1.

Nutrition per 100 g

NutrientGemma di Riso, CoccoRýžová kaše meruňka
Nutri-Score e d
NOVA group 4 4
Calories 514 kcal 401 kcal
Fat 28.1 g 6.1 g
Saturated fat 16 g 4 g
Sugars 23.4 g 29 g
Salt 0.5 g 0.2 g
Fiber 1.9 g —
Protein 5.6 g 8.8 g
Additives42
AllergensEggsMilk

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

Key differences

  • Rýžová kaše meruňka has 22% fewer calories (401 kcal vs 514 kcal).
  • Rýžová kaše meruňka has 78% less fat (6.1 g vs 28.1 g).
  • Rýžová kaše meruňka has 75% less saturated fat (4 g vs 16 g).
  • Gemma di Riso, Cocco has 19% less sugar (23.4 g vs 29 g).
  • Rýžová kaše meruňka has 65% less salt (0.2 g vs 0.5 g).
  • Rýžová kaše meruňka has 36% more protein (8.8 g vs 5.6 g).
  • Rýžová kaše meruňka has the better Nutri-Score.
  • Only Gemma di Riso, Cocco lists: Eggs.
  • Only Rýžová kaše meruňka lists: Milk.

Ingredients

Gemma di Riso, Cocco

rice flour 33%, sugar, vegetable margarine (palm oil, water), coconut 15%, eggs, corn starch, honey, raising agents: disodium diphosphate, sodium hydrogen carbonate, vanillin, flavorings, salt,

Rýžová kaše meruňka

Instantní rýže 40 %, sušené PLNOTUČNÉ MLÉKO, cukr, modifikovaný škrob, sušené meruňky 1,3 % (meruñňky 96 % (obsahují antioxidant oxid siñičitý), rýžová mouka), aroma, barvivo (karoteny).

FAQ

Which is healthier: Gemma di Riso, Cocco or Rýžová kaše meruňka?

Overall, Rýžová kaše meruňka 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?

Rýžová kaše meruňka has fewer calories: 401 kcal versus 514 kcal per 100 g.

Which has less sugar?

Gemma di Riso, Cocco has less sugar: 23.4 g versus 29 g per 100 g.

More comparisons