Comparison

Parówki z filetem z indyka vs Longaniza de Pavo

Overall, Parówki z filetem z indyka has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 7 of our comparison points versus 1.

Nutrition per 100 g

NutrientParówki z filetem z indykaLonganiza de Pavo
Nutri-Score d e
NOVA group 4 4
Calories 190 kcal 315 kcal
Fat 14 g 18 g
Saturated fat 4.3 g 6.8 g
Sugars 0.9 g 2.7 g
Salt 1.6 g 4.3 g
Protein 15 g 31 g
Additives04
AllergensNone listedMilk

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

Key differences

  • Parówki z filetem z indyka has 40% fewer calories (190 kcal vs 315 kcal).
  • Parówki z filetem z indyka has 22% less fat (14 g vs 18 g).
  • Parówki z filetem z indyka has 37% less saturated fat (4.3 g vs 6.8 g).
  • Parówki z filetem z indyka has 67% less sugar (0.9 g vs 2.7 g).
  • Parówki z filetem z indyka has 63% less salt (1.6 g vs 4.3 g).
  • Longaniza de Pavo has 52% more protein (31 g vs 15 g).
  • Parówki z filetem z indyka has the better Nutri-Score.
  • Only Longaniza de Pavo lists: Milk.

Ingredients

Parówki z filetem z indyka

93% mięso z indyka (w tym: 21% mięso z piersi indyka), naturalne aromaty, sól, woda, przyprawy, ekstrakty przypraw, glukoza.

Longaniza de Pavo

Carne de pavo (137g para obtener 100g de producto final), grasa de pavo, leche desnatada en polvo, sal, lactosa, aromas, especias, azúcar, antioxidante (E-301), dextrosa y conservadores (E-250, E-252) y colorante (E-120).

FAQ

Which is healthier: Parówki z filetem z indyka or Longaniza de Pavo?

Overall, Parówki z filetem z indyka 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?

Parówki z filetem z indyka has fewer calories: 190 kcal versus 315 kcal per 100 g.

Which has less sugar?

Parówki z filetem z indyka has less sugar: 0.9 g versus 2.7 g per 100 g.

More comparisons