Lorenz Saltletts Sticks vs Sticks Vegetales
Overall, Lorenz Saltletts Sticks has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 6 of our comparison points versus 1.
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Lorenz Saltletts Sticks | Sticks Vegetales |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | e | e |
| NOVA group | 3 | 4 |
| Calories | 392 kcal | 490 kcal |
| Fat | 5.9 g | 23.6 g |
| Saturated fat | 0.8 g | 2.5 g |
| Sugars | 2.4 g | 2.3 g |
| Salt | 3.8 g | 2.3 g |
| Fiber | 3 g | 1.8 g |
| Protein | 12 g | 3.3 g |
| Additives | 1 | 0 |
| Allergens | Gluten | None listed |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Lorenz Saltletts Sticks has 20% fewer calories (392 kcal vs 490 kcal).
- Lorenz Saltletts Sticks has 75% less fat (5.9 g vs 23.6 g).
- Lorenz Saltletts Sticks has 68% less saturated fat (0.8 g vs 2.5 g).
- Sticks Vegetales has 39% less salt (2.3 g vs 3.8 g).
- Lorenz Saltletts Sticks has 40% more fiber (3 g vs 1.8 g).
- Lorenz Saltletts Sticks has 73% more protein (12 g vs 3.3 g).
- Lorenz Saltletts Sticks is less processed (lower NOVA group).
- Only Lorenz Saltletts Sticks lists: Gluten.
Ingredients
Lorenz Saltletts Sticks
89 % WEIZENMEHL, Rapsöl, Speisesalz, 1,3 % Meersalz, GERSTENMALZEXTRAKT, Hefe, Säureregulator: Natriumhydroxid
Sticks Vegetales
E 49% fécula de patata, 30% harina de patata, aceite de girasol, 2% tomate concentrado, sal, almidón de maíz, aroma natural, 0,9% espinaca en polvo, azúcar de caña, 0,08% cúrcuma, 0,03% remolacha en polvo,
FAQ
Which is healthier: Lorenz Saltletts Sticks or Sticks Vegetales?
Overall, Lorenz Saltletts Sticks 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?
Lorenz Saltletts Sticks has fewer calories: 392 kcal versus 490 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Sticks Vegetales has less sugar: 2.3 g versus 2.4 g per 100 g.