Mirin rice wine vs Shaoxing Cooking Wine
Overall, Shaoxing Cooking Wine has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 4 of our comparison points versus 1.
Nutrition per 100 ml
| Nutrient | Mirin rice wine | Shaoxing Cooking Wine |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | — | — |
| NOVA group | 4 | 3 |
| Calories | 216 kcal | 10 kcal |
| Fat | 0 g | 0 g |
| Saturated fat | 0 g | 0 g |
| Sugars | 43 g | 0.9 g |
| Salt | 0 g | 1.5 g |
| Fiber | 0 g | 0 g |
| Protein | 0 g | 0.6 g |
| Additives | 0 | 0 |
| Allergens | None listed | None listed |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Shaoxing Cooking Wine has 95% fewer calories (10 kcal vs 216 kcal).
- Shaoxing Cooking Wine has 98% less sugar (0.9 g vs 43 g).
- Mirin rice wine has no salt, while Shaoxing Cooking Wine has 1.5 g.
- Shaoxing Cooking Wine has 100% more protein (0.6 g vs 0 g).
- Shaoxing Cooking Wine is less processed (lower NOVA group).
Ingredients
Mirin rice wine
Maize glucose syrup, water, rice, alcohol, corn syrup
Shaoxing Cooking Wine
Rice wine 98.5% (Water 59.1%, Rice 39.4%), Salt.
FAQ
Which is healthier: Mirin rice wine or Shaoxing Cooking Wine?
Overall, Shaoxing Cooking Wine 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?
Shaoxing Cooking Wine has fewer calories: 10 kcal versus 216 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Shaoxing Cooking Wine has less sugar: 0.9 g versus 43 g per 100 g.