Kruidenboter vs Kruidenboter knoflook
Overall, Kruidenboter has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 1 of our comparison points versus 0.
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Kruidenboter | Kruidenboter knoflook |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | e | e |
| NOVA group | 2 | 2 |
| Calories | 681 kcal | 728 kcal |
| Fat | 74.4 g | 79 g |
| Saturated fat | 42.7 g | 48 g |
| Sugars | 0.5 g | 0.6 g |
| Salt | 1 g | 1.2 g |
| Fiber | 0.5 g | 0.6 g |
| Protein | 1 g | 1.2 g |
| Additives | 2 | 0 |
| Allergens | Milk | None listed |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Kruidenboter has 11% less saturated fat (42.7 g vs 48 g).
- Only Kruidenboter lists: Milk.
Ingredients
Kruidenboter
Roomboter (MELK) (75,6%), raapolie (11,9%), bieslook, peterselie, knoflook, zout, witte peper. conserveermiddelen (E202; E270)
Kruidenboter knoflook
Not available.
FAQ
Which is healthier: Kruidenboter or Kruidenboter knoflook?
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: 681 kcal versus 728 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Kruidenboter has less sugar: 0.5 g versus 0.6 g per 100 g.