Mango Fruchtaufstrich vs Mermelada de mango de temporada
Overall, Mango Fruchtaufstrich has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 4 of our comparison points versus 2.
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Mango Fruchtaufstrich | Mermelada de mango de tempor... |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | b | — |
| NOVA group | 4 | 4 |
| Calories | 164 kcal | 206 kcal |
| Fat | 5.9 g | 0.2 g |
| Saturated fat | 0.7 g | 0 g |
| Sugars | 20 g | 47 g |
| Salt | 0 g | 0 g |
| Fiber | 4.4 g | 1.2 g |
| Protein | 3.7 g | 0.5 g |
| Additives | 1 | 2 |
| Allergens | None listed | None listed |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Mango Fruchtaufstrich has 20% fewer calories (164 kcal vs 206 kcal).
- Mermelada de mango de temporada has 97% less fat (0.2 g vs 5.9 g).
- Mermelada de mango de temporada has 99% less saturated fat (0 g vs 0.7 g).
- Mango Fruchtaufstrich has 57% less sugar (20 g vs 47 g).
- Mango Fruchtaufstrich has 73% more fiber (4.4 g vs 1.2 g).
- Mango Fruchtaufstrich has 86% more protein (3.7 g vs 0.5 g).
Ingredients
Mango Fruchtaufstrich
50% Mangos, 20% Maracujasaft aus Maracujasaftkonzentrat, Zucker, 5% Chiasamen 4% Sonnenblumenkerne, Zitronensaftkonzentrat, (Salvia hispanica), 5% Goldleinsamen, Geliermittel Pektin, Karottensaftkonzentrat
Mermelada de mango de temporada
Mango, azúcar, zumo de limón a partir de concentrado, gelificante: pectina de cítricos (E-440) y antioxidante: ácido L-ascórbico (E-300).
FAQ
Which is healthier: Mango Fruchtaufstrich or Mermelada de mango de temporada?
Overall, Mango Fruchtaufstrich 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?
Mango Fruchtaufstrich has fewer calories: 164 kcal versus 206 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Mango Fruchtaufstrich has less sugar: 20 g versus 47 g per 100 g.