Knoflookboter vs Kruidenboter knoflook
Overall, Kruidenboter knoflook has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 2 of our comparison points versus 1.
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Knoflookboter | Kruidenboter knoflook |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | e | e |
| NOVA group | 4 | 2 |
| Calories | 696 kcal | 728 kcal |
| Fat | 74.8 g | 79 g |
| Saturated fat | 47 g | 48 g |
| Sugars | 3.3 g | 0.6 g |
| Salt | 0.6 g | 1.2 g |
| Fiber | — | 0.6 g |
| Protein | 1.2 g | 1.2 g |
| Additives | 0 | 0 |
| Allergens | Milk | None listed |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Kruidenboter knoflook has 82% less sugar (0.6 g vs 3.3 g).
- Knoflookboter has 53% less salt (0.6 g vs 1.2 g).
- Kruidenboter knoflook is less processed (lower NOVA group).
- Only Knoflookboter lists: Milk.
Ingredients
Knoflookboter
boter (melk), raapzaadolie, water, 3,5% gedroogde knoflook, gedroogde ui, zout, citroenaroma, kaneel
Kruidenboter knoflook
Not available.
FAQ
Which is healthier: Knoflookboter or Kruidenboter knoflook?
Overall, Kruidenboter knoflook 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?
Knoflookboter has fewer calories: 696 kcal versus 728 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Kruidenboter knoflook has less sugar: 0.6 g versus 3.3 g per 100 g.