Panna cotta mangue passion vs Panna cotta fruits rouges
Overall, Panna cotta fruits rouges has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 6 of our comparison points versus 1.
Panna cotta mangue passion
Panna cotta fruits rouges
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Panna cotta mangue passion | Panna cotta fruits rouges |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | d | c |
| NOVA group | — | 4 |
| Calories | 229 kcal | 121 kcal |
| Fat | 11.3 g | 6 g |
| Saturated fat | 7.9 g | 2.1 g |
| Sugars | 18.2 g | 12.7 g |
| Salt | 0.1 g | 0.2 g |
| Fiber | 0.7 g | — |
| Protein | 3 g | 2.6 g |
| Additives | 0 | 1 |
| Allergens | None listed | Milk |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Panna cotta fruits rouges has 47% fewer calories (121 kcal vs 229 kcal).
- Panna cotta fruits rouges has 47% less fat (6 g vs 11.3 g).
- Panna cotta fruits rouges has 73% less saturated fat (2.1 g vs 7.9 g).
- Panna cotta fruits rouges has 30% less sugar (12.7 g vs 18.2 g).
- Panna cotta mangue passion has 13% more protein (3 g vs 2.6 g).
- Panna cotta fruits rouges has the better Nutri-Score.
- Only Panna cotta fruits rouges lists: Milk.
Ingredients
Panna cotta mangue passion
Not available.
Panna cotta fruits rouges
Panna cotta 88% (lait entier, crème liquide, sucre de canne, manioc, gélifiant : agar-agar), nappage fruit 12% (purées (framboise 3,3%, myrtille sauvage 2,2%), sucre de canne, jus de citron concentré, gélifiant : agar-agar).
FAQ
Which is healthier: Panna cotta mangue passion or Panna cotta fruits rouges?
Overall, Panna cotta fruits rouges 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?
Panna cotta fruits rouges has fewer calories: 121 kcal versus 229 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Panna cotta fruits rouges has less sugar: 12.7 g versus 18.2 g per 100 g.