Comparison
Goldband Selar vs Fish Snack
Overall, Fish Snack has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 6 of our comparison points versus 2.
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Goldband Selar | Fish Snack |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | e | b |
| NOVA group | — | — |
| Calories | 291 kcal | 79 kcal |
| Fat | 5.3 g | 0.1 g |
| Saturated fat | 3.2 g | 0 g |
| Sugars | 1.2 g | 2.2 g |
| Salt | 9.1 g | 1.6 g |
| Protein | 56.2 g | 16.6 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
- Fish Snack has 73% fewer calories (79 kcal vs 291 kcal).
- Fish Snack has 98% less fat (0.1 g vs 5.3 g).
- Fish Snack has no saturated fat, while Goldband Selar has 3.2 g.
- Goldband Selar has 44% less sugar (1.2 g vs 2.2 g).
- Fish Snack has 83% less salt (1.6 g vs 9.1 g).
- Goldband Selar has 71% more protein (56.2 g vs 16.6 g).
- Fish Snack has the better Nutri-Score.
Ingredients
Goldband Selar
Not available.
Fish Snack
Not available.
FAQ
Which is healthier: Goldband Selar or Fish Snack?
Overall, Fish Snack 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 Snack has fewer calories: 79 kcal versus 291 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Goldband Selar has less sugar: 1.2 g versus 2.2 g per 100 g.