Comparison

Palette à la Diable vs Palette a la diable à l'alsacienne

Overall, Palette à la Diable has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 2 of our comparison points versus 1.

Nutrition per 100 g

NutrientPalette à la DiablePalette a la diable à l'alsa...
Nutri-Score d d
NOVA group — 4
Calories 126 kcal 120 kcal
Fat 6.7 g 6.5 g
Saturated fat 2.6 g 2.1 g
Sugars 0.5 g 0.8 g
Salt 2 g 1.9 g
Fiber — 0 g
Protein 14 g 10 g
Additives05
AllergensNone listedGluten, Mustard, Sulphur dioxide and sulphites

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

Key differences

  • Palette a la diable à l'alsacienne has 19% less saturated fat (2.1 g vs 2.6 g).
  • Palette à la Diable has 38% less sugar (0.5 g vs 0.8 g).
  • Palette à la Diable has 29% more protein (14 g vs 10 g).
  • Only Palette a la diable à l'alsacienne lists: Gluten, Mustard, Sulphur dioxide and sulphites.

Ingredients

Palette à la Diable

Not available.

Palette a la diable à l'alsacienne

78% épaule de porc saumurée (48% épaule de porc (Origine: France), eau, sel, sirop de glucose, émulsifiant : diphosphates, arômes naturels, acidifiant : acétates de sodium; antioxydant: ascorbate de sodium ; dextrose, conservateur: nitrite de sodium), 20% préparation de _moutarde_ (eau, graines de _moutarde_, vinaigre d'alcool, farine de _blé_, sel, épices, persil, arômes, conservateur: _Bisulfite_ de sodium), 2% crépine de porc. Traces éventuelles d'œuf, de lait et de pistaches.

FAQ

Which is healthier: Palette à la Diable or Palette a la diable à l'alsacienne?

Overall, Palette à la Diable 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?

Palette a la diable à l'alsacienne has fewer calories: 120 kcal versus 126 kcal per 100 g.

Which has less sugar?

Palette à la Diable has less sugar: 0.5 g versus 0.8 g per 100 g.

More comparisons