Comparison

HuLaLa vs Land: Italian &quot

Overall, Land: Italian &quot has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 7 of our comparison points versus 0.

Nutrition per 100 ml

NutrientHuLaLaLand: Italian &quot
Nutri-Score e d
NOVA group 4 4
Calories 298 kcal 224 kcal
Fat 27 g 22 g
Saturated fat 27 g 15 g
Sugars 11 g 3.8 g
Salt 0.2 g 0.1 g
Fiber — 1.4 g
Protein 0.6 g 2.6 g
Additives61
AllergensMilk, SoybeansMilk, PANNA

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

Key differences

  • Land: Italian &quot has 25% fewer calories (224 kcal vs 298 kcal).
  • Land: Italian &quot has 19% less fat (22 g vs 27 g).
  • Land: Italian &quot has 44% less saturated fat (15 g vs 27 g).
  • Land: Italian &quot has 65% less sugar (3.8 g vs 11 g).
  • Land: Italian &quot has 77% more protein (2.6 g vs 0.6 g).
  • Land: Italian &quot has the better Nutri-Score.
  • Only HuLaLa lists: Soybeans.
  • Only Land: Italian &quot lists: PANNA.

Ingredients

HuLaLa

Víz, teljes mértékben hidrogénezett növényi zsírok és olajok (26%] [zsírok: pálmamag, olajok: napraforgó], cukor (11%), stabilizátorok: szorbit, hidroxipropil-cellulóz; tejfehérje, emulgeálószerek: E 472e, lecitinek (szója), E 472b; só, aromák, színezék: karotinok. Nyomokban földimogyorót tartalmazhat.

Land: Italian &quot

PANNA, stabilizzante (carragenina).

FAQ

Which is healthier: HuLaLa or Land: Italian &quot?

Overall, Land: Italian &quot 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?

Land: Italian &quot has fewer calories: 224 kcal versus 298 kcal per 100 g.

Which has less sugar?

Land: Italian &quot has less sugar: 3.8 g versus 11 g per 100 g.

More comparisons