Comparison

Käse-Cabanossi vs Kiełbasa sucha Krakowska

Overall, Kiełbasa sucha Krakowska has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 5 of our comparison points versus 0.

Nutrition per 100 g

NutrientKäse-CabanossiKiełbasa sucha Krakowska
Nutri-Score e e
NOVA group 4 3
Calories 483 kcal 212 kcal
Fat 41 g 11 g
Saturated fat 18 g 4.1 g
Sugars 1.5 g 0 g
Salt 3.2 g 3.4 g
Fiber 0 g 0.1 g
Protein 27 g 28 g
Additives31
AllergensMilkNone listed

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

Key differences

  • Kiełbasa sucha Krakowska has 56% fewer calories (212 kcal vs 483 kcal).
  • Kiełbasa sucha Krakowska has 73% less fat (11 g vs 41 g).
  • Kiełbasa sucha Krakowska has 77% less saturated fat (4.1 g vs 18 g).
  • Kiełbasa sucha Krakowska has no sugar, while Käse-Cabanossi has 1.5 g.
  • Kiełbasa sucha Krakowska is less processed (lower NOVA group).
  • Only Käse-Cabanossi lists: Milk.

Ingredients

Käse-Cabanossi

Schweinefleisch, Emmentaler, Nitritpökelsalz (Speisesalz, Konservierungsstoff: Natriumnitrit), Gewürze, Stabilisator: Natriumcitrate; Dextrose, Antioxidationsmittel: Ascorbinsäure; Gewürzextrakte, essbare Wursthülle (Rinderkollagen), Buchenholzrauch. Dieses Produkt ist von Natur aus glutenfrei.

Kiełbasa sucha Krakowska

mięso wieprzowe, mięso wołowe (100 g produktu wytworzono ze 127 g mięsa wieprzowego 14 g mięsa wołowego), sól, przyprawy, przeciwutleniacze: cytrynian sodu, askorbinian sodu, substancja konserwująca: azotyn sodu.

FAQ

Which is healthier: Käse-Cabanossi or Kiełbasa sucha Krakowska?

Overall, Kiełbasa sucha Krakowska 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?

Kiełbasa sucha Krakowska has fewer calories: 212 kcal versus 483 kcal per 100 g.

Which has less sugar?

Kiełbasa sucha Krakowska has less sugar: 0 g versus 1.5 g per 100 g.

More comparisons