Comparison

Haché de poulet cuit vs Burger meat vacuno cerdo

Overall, Burger meat vacuno cerdo has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 4 of our comparison points versus 3.

Nutrition per 100 g

NutrientHaché de poulet cuitBurger meat vacuno cerdo
Nutri-Score d c
NOVA group 4 4
Calories 182 kcal 195 kcal
Fat 10 g 12 g
Saturated fat 3 g 6 g
Sugars 1.7 g 0.5 g
Salt 1.9 g 0.6 g
Fiber 1.6 g —
Protein 20 g 17 g
Additives03
AllergensGlutenSulphur dioxide and sulphites

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

Key differences

  • Haché de poulet cuit has 17% less fat (10 g vs 12 g).
  • Haché de poulet cuit has 50% less saturated fat (3 g vs 6 g).
  • Burger meat vacuno cerdo has 71% less sugar (0.5 g vs 1.7 g).
  • Burger meat vacuno cerdo has 68% less salt (0.6 g vs 1.9 g).
  • Haché de poulet cuit has 15% more protein (20 g vs 17 g).
  • Burger meat vacuno cerdo has the better Nutri-Score.
  • Only Haché de poulet cuit lists: Gluten.
  • Only Burger meat vacuno cerdo lists: Sulphur dioxide and sulphites.

Ingredients

Haché de poulet cuit

Viande de poulet 67% (origine France), eau, gluten de _blé_, gras de poulet, dextrose, farine de _blé_, fibre de blé, fécule de pomme de terre, arômes naturels, sel, vinaigre en poudre neutralisé.

Burger meat vacuno cerdo

Carne de vacuno (45%), carne de cerdo (45%), agua, fibra vegetal (guisante), cereal (maíz), antioxidantes (E-331, E-301), aroma, conservador (E-221) (sulfito).

FAQ

Which is healthier: Haché de poulet cuit or Burger meat vacuno cerdo?

Overall, Burger meat vacuno cerdo 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?

Haché de poulet cuit has fewer calories: 182 kcal versus 195 kcal per 100 g.

Which has less sugar?

Burger meat vacuno cerdo has less sugar: 0.5 g versus 1.7 g per 100 g.

More comparisons