Panzani sauce tomate basilic nat 650g f12 vs Mutti Pastasaus met basilicum
Overall, Mutti Pastasaus met basilicum has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 2 of our comparison points versus 1.
Panzani sauce tomate basilic nat 650g f12
Mutti Pastasaus met basilicum
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Panzani sauce tomate basilic... | Mutti Pastasaus met basilicu... |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | a | a |
| NOVA group | 4 | 4 |
| Calories | 62 kcal | 56 kcal |
| Fat | 2.3 g | 2.8 g |
| Saturated fat | 0.3 g | 0.5 g |
| Sugars | 6.3 g | 4.5 g |
| Salt | 0.9 g | 0.8 g |
| Fiber | 1.3 g | 1.8 g |
| Protein | 1.6 g | 1.6 g |
| Additives | 0 | 0 |
| Allergens | None listed | Celery |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Panzani sauce tomate basilic nat 650g f12 has 18% less fat (2.3 g vs 2.8 g).
- Mutti Pastasaus met basilicum has 29% less sugar (4.5 g vs 6.3 g).
- Mutti Pastasaus met basilicum has 28% more fiber (1.8 g vs 1.3 g).
- Only Mutti Pastasaus met basilicum lists: Celery.
Ingredients
Panzani sauce tomate basilic nat 650g f12
Pulpe de tomates fraîches avec morceaux et purées de tomates fraîches 85%, oignons, carottes, huile d'olive vierge, basilic 1,4%, sucre, sel, amidon, arôme naturel, extrait d'oignon, persil.
Mutti Pastasaus met basilicum
Gehackte Tomaten 60 %, passierte Tomaten 21%, Tomatenmark 10,2%, Olivenöl, Zwiebeln, Basilikum 1,5%, Karotten, natürliche Aromen, Salz
FAQ
Which is healthier: Panzani sauce tomate basilic nat 650g f12 or Mutti Pastasaus met basilicum?
Overall, Mutti Pastasaus met basilicum 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?
Mutti Pastasaus met basilicum has fewer calories: 56 kcal versus 62 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Mutti Pastasaus met basilicum has less sugar: 4.5 g versus 6.3 g per 100 g.