Mackrel Fillets in spicy tomato sauce vs Filets de maquereau avec peau
Neither product is clearly better overall — it depends on what matters most to you.
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Mackrel Fillets in spicy tom... | Filets de maquereau avec pea... |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | c | c |
| NOVA group | 3 | 1 |
| Calories | 165 kcal | 246 kcal |
| Fat | 9.2 g | 20 g |
| Saturated fat | 2.3 g | 4.7 g |
| Sugars | 5.1 g | 0 g |
| Salt | 0.9 g | 0.8 g |
| Fiber | 0 g | 0 g |
| Protein | 13.3 g | 17 g |
| Additives | 0 | 0 |
| Allergens | Fish | Fish |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Mackrel Fillets in spicy tomato sauce has 33% fewer calories (165 kcal vs 246 kcal).
- Mackrel Fillets in spicy tomato sauce has 54% less fat (9.2 g vs 20 g).
- Mackrel Fillets in spicy tomato sauce has 51% less saturated fat (2.3 g vs 4.7 g).
- Filets de maquereau avec peau has no sugar, while Mackrel Fillets in spicy tomato sauce has 5.1 g.
- Filets de maquereau avec peau has 22% more protein (17 g vs 13.3 g).
- Filets de maquereau avec peau is less processed (lower NOVA group).
Ingredients
Mackrel Fillets in spicy tomato sauce
64% Mackerel Fillets (Fish), Water, 12% Tomato Purée, Sugar, Spirit Vinegar, Spices (Chilli, Star Anise, Nutmeg, Cinnamon, Paprika, Coriander, Fenugreek, Cumin, Turmeric, Garlic, Pepper, Fennel, Clove, Caraway, Ginger, Allspice), Bitter Orange Peel, Salt.
Filets de maquereau avec peau
Maquereau
FAQ
Which is healthier: Mackrel Fillets in spicy tomato sauce or Filets de maquereau avec peau?
Neither product is clearly better overall — it depends on what matters most to you. 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?
Mackrel Fillets in spicy tomato sauce has fewer calories: 165 kcal versus 246 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Filets de maquereau avec peau has less sugar: 0 g versus 5.1 g per 100 g.