Hoisin No Duck Wrap vs Wrap chèvre tomates x 2
Overall, Hoisin No Duck Wrap 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 | Hoisin No Duck Wrap | Wrap chèvre tomates x 2 |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | c | c |
| NOVA group | 4 | 4 |
| Calories | 215 kcal | 266 kcal |
| Fat | 6.2 g | 16 g |
| Saturated fat | 1.6 g | 3.2 g |
| Sugars | 6 g | 2.4 g |
| Salt | 1 g | 1 g |
| Fiber | 1.6 g | 2.4 g |
| Protein | 10.4 g | 6.5 g |
| Additives | 4 | 4 |
| Allergens | Gluten | Eggs, Gluten, Milk, Mustard |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Hoisin No Duck Wrap has 19% fewer calories (215 kcal vs 266 kcal).
- Hoisin No Duck Wrap has 61% less fat (6.2 g vs 16 g).
- Hoisin No Duck Wrap has 50% less saturated fat (1.6 g vs 3.2 g).
- Wrap chèvre tomates x 2 has 60% less sugar (2.4 g vs 6 g).
- Wrap chèvre tomates x 2 has 33% more fiber (2.4 g vs 1.6 g).
- Hoisin No Duck Wrap has 38% more protein (10.4 g vs 6.5 g).
- Only Wrap chèvre tomates x 2 lists: Eggs, Milk, Mustard.
Ingredients
Hoisin No Duck Wrap
Wheatflour contains Gluten (with Wheatflour, Calcium Carbonate, Iron, Niacin, Thiamin) Water. Cucumber (11%) Hoisin Sauce (10%) (Water Muscovado Sugar Soybeans Sugar Brown Sugar Concentrated Plum Juice Tomato Paste Cornflour Salt Black Treacle Ginger Purée Red Chilli Purée. Vegetable Oil (Sunflower/Rapeseed). Red Wine Vinegar Molasses Rice Vinegar Five Spice (Cinnamon. Fennel. Ginger. Aniseed Cloves) Barley Malt Vinegar (contains Gluten) Barley Malt Extract (contains Gluten). Wheatflour contains Gluten (with Wheatflour, Calcium Carbonate, Iron, Niacin, Thiamin) Acidy Regulator: Acetic Acid). Spinach (7%) Wheat and Pea Protein (5%) (Hydrolysed Wheat (contains Gluten). Pea Potato) Palm Oil Spring Onions (1.5%) Rapeseed Oil Wheat Gluten Humectant: Glycerol Sugar Vegetable Oil (Sunflower/Rapeseed). Yeast Extract Pea Starch Flavouring Salt Emulsifier: E471 Ground Spices (Star Anise Cinnamon - Fennel Seeds Black Pepper Cloves). Dextrose Barley Malt Extract (contains Gluten). Acidity Regulator: Malic Acid. Potato Starch Thickener: Gum Arabic Coconut Oil Flour Treatment Agent: E920. . . . " . # • . . " • * . • • • · • . • •
Wrap chèvre tomates x 2
Galette de blé avec graines de lin 47 % (farine de blé, eau, huile de colza, graines de lin 1 %, poudres à lever : E500 ; E450, dextrose, acidifiant : E296, sel) ; mayonnaise (huile de colza, eau, moutarde (eau ; graines de moutarde ; vinaigre ; sel), jaune d'œuf, vinaigre d'alcool, sucre, sel, jus de citron concentré) ; fromage de chèvre 11 % ; salade 7,9 % ; tomates mi séchées marinées 7,9 % (tomates 7,3 %, huile de colza, sel, origan, ail) ; concombre 5,3 % ; eau ; poivrons jaunes grillés 2,6 % ; yaourt maigre brassé ; amidon modifié de pomme de terre ; huile d'olive vierge. Traces de poissons, graines de sésame et soja.
FAQ
Which is healthier: Hoisin No Duck Wrap or Wrap chèvre tomates x 2?
Overall, Hoisin No Duck Wrap 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?
Hoisin No Duck Wrap has fewer calories: 215 kcal versus 266 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Wrap chèvre tomates x 2 has less sugar: 2.4 g versus 6 g per 100 g.