Comparison

Maple Chicken Patties vs Viande hachée pur boeuf prête à cuisiner

Overall, Viande hachée pur boeuf prête à cuisiner has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 4 of our comparison points versus 3.

Nutrition per 100 g

NutrientMaple Chicken PattiesViande hachée pur boeuf prêt...
Nutri-Score d —
NOVA group 3 1
Calories 186 kcal 208 kcal
Fat 10.5 g 14 g
Saturated fat 2.3 g 5.7 g
Sugars 3.5 g 0 g
Salt 1.6 g 0.1 g
Fiber 0 g 0 g
Protein 16.3 g 20 g
Additives10
AllergensChickenNone listed

Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).

Key differences

  • Maple Chicken Patties has 11% fewer calories (186 kcal vs 208 kcal).
  • Maple Chicken Patties has 25% less fat (10.5 g vs 14 g).
  • Maple Chicken Patties has 59% less saturated fat (2.3 g vs 5.7 g).
  • Viande hachée pur boeuf prête à cuisiner has no sugar, while Maple Chicken Patties has 3.5 g.
  • Viande hachée pur boeuf prête à cuisiner has 94% less salt (0.1 g vs 1.6 g).
  • Viande hachée pur boeuf prête à cuisiner has 19% more protein (20 g vs 16.3 g).
  • Viande hachée pur boeuf prête à cuisiner is less processed (lower NOVA group).
  • Only Maple Chicken Patties lists: Chicken.

Ingredients

Maple Chicken Patties

Chicken, Pure Maple Syrup, Maple Extract, Sea Salt, Spices, Parsley, Crushed Red Pepper, Vinegar, Extract of Rosemary, Dried Citrus Pulp.

Viande hachée pur boeuf prête à cuisiner

Pure viande bovine (origine : France)

FAQ

Which is healthier: Maple Chicken Patties or Viande hachée pur boeuf prête à cuisiner?

Overall, Viande hachée pur boeuf prête à cuisiner 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?

Maple Chicken Patties has fewer calories: 186 kcal versus 208 kcal per 100 g.

Which has less sugar?

Viande hachée pur boeuf prête à cuisiner has less sugar: 0 g versus 3.5 g per 100 g.

More comparisons