Comparison
Kombu Cha Vivo vs Garrofa a la tassa
Overall, Kombu Cha Vivo has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 6 of our comparison points versus 2.
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Kombu Cha Vivo | Garrofa a la tassa |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | b | e |
| NOVA group | — | — |
| Calories | 24 kcal | 457 kcal |
| Fat | 0 g | 19.8 g |
| Saturated fat | 0 g | 12.5 g |
| Sugars | 5.6 g | 55.3 g |
| Salt | 0 g | 0 g |
| Fiber | 0 g | 7.8 g |
| Protein | 0 g | 1.6 g |
| Additives | 0 | 0 |
| Allergens | None listed | None listed |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Kombu Cha Vivo has 95% fewer calories (24 kcal vs 457 kcal).
- Kombu Cha Vivo has no fat, while Garrofa a la tassa has 19.8 g.
- Kombu Cha Vivo has no saturated fat, while Garrofa a la tassa has 12.5 g.
- Kombu Cha Vivo has 90% less sugar (5.6 g vs 55.3 g).
- Garrofa a la tassa has 100% more fiber (7.8 g vs 0 g).
- Garrofa a la tassa has 100% more protein (1.6 g vs 0 g).
- Kombu Cha Vivo has the better Nutri-Score.
Ingredients
Kombu Cha Vivo
Not available.
Garrofa a la tassa
Not available.
FAQ
Which is healthier: Kombu Cha Vivo or Garrofa a la tassa?
Overall, Kombu Cha Vivo 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?
Kombu Cha Vivo has fewer calories: 24 kcal versus 457 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Kombu Cha Vivo has less sugar: 5.6 g versus 55.3 g per 100 g.