Liégeois Café Arabica vs Fleur de mousse au café sur ganache au café
Overall, Liégeois Café Arabica has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 3 of our comparison points versus 1.
Liégeois Café Arabica
Fleur de mousse au café sur ganache au café
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Liégeois Café Arabica | Fleur de mousse au café sur... |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | d | d |
| NOVA group | — | 4 |
| Calories | 218 kcal | 380 kcal |
| Fat | 17 g | 33 g |
| Saturated fat | 11 g | 23 g |
| Sugars | 12 g | 13 g |
| Salt | 0.2 g | 0.1 g |
| Fiber | — | 2 g |
| Protein | 3.1 g | 4 g |
| Additives | 0 | 2 |
| Allergens | None listed | Eggs, Milk, Soybeans |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Liégeois Café Arabica has 43% fewer calories (218 kcal vs 380 kcal).
- Liégeois Café Arabica has 48% less fat (17 g vs 33 g).
- Liégeois Café Arabica has 52% less saturated fat (11 g vs 23 g).
- Fleur de mousse au café sur ganache au café has 22% more protein (4 g vs 3.1 g).
- Only Fleur de mousse au café sur ganache au café lists: Eggs, Milk, Soybeans.
Ingredients
Liégeois Café Arabica
Not available.
Fleur de mousse au café sur ganache au café
CRÈME DE LAIT - chocolat blanc (sucre, beurre de cacao 5,5%, poudre de LAIT entier, émulsifiant : lécithine de SOJA, arôme naturel de vanille) - extrait de café 4% ( dont caramel aromatique ) - sirop de glucose - poudre de blanc d'ŒUF de poules élevées en plein air.
FAQ
Which is healthier: Liégeois Café Arabica or Fleur de mousse au café sur ganache au café?
Overall, Liégeois Café Arabica 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?
Liégeois Café Arabica has fewer calories: 218 kcal versus 380 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Liégeois Café Arabica has less sugar: 12 g versus 13 g per 100 g.