Comparison

Knoflookboter vs Kruidenboter

Overall, Kruidenboter has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 5 of our comparison points versus 1.

Nutrition per 100 g

NutrientKnoflookboterKruidenboter
Nutri-Score e e
NOVA group 4 2
Calories 696 kcal 596 kcal
Fat 74.8 g 64.6 g
Saturated fat 47 g 41.8 g
Sugars 3.3 g 0.6 g
Salt 0.6 g 0.9 g
Fiber — 0.5 g
Protein 1.2 g 1 g
Additives02
AllergensMilkMilk

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

Key differences

  • Kruidenboter has 14% fewer calories (596 kcal vs 696 kcal).
  • Kruidenboter has 14% less fat (64.6 g vs 74.8 g).
  • Kruidenboter has 11% less saturated fat (41.8 g vs 47 g).
  • Kruidenboter has 82% less sugar (0.6 g vs 3.3 g).
  • Knoflookboter has 37% less salt (0.6 g vs 0.9 g).
  • Kruidenboter is less processed (lower NOVA group).

Ingredients

Knoflookboter

boter (melk), raapzaadolie, water, 3,5% gedroogde knoflook, gedroogde ui, zout, citroenaroma, kaneel

Kruidenboter

76% Roomboter (MELK) water, 5% kruiden (peterselie, bieslook dragon, oregano, kervel), 0,8% specerijen, knoflookpoeder, uipoeder, zout, gistextract, zoethoutwortelpoeder, suiker, conserveermiddel: E270/E202, voedingszuur: citroen zuur.

FAQ

Which is healthier: Knoflookboter or Kruidenboter?

Overall, Kruidenboter 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?

Kruidenboter has fewer calories: 596 kcal versus 696 kcal per 100 g.

Which has less sugar?

Kruidenboter has less sugar: 0.6 g versus 3.3 g per 100 g.

More comparisons