Comparison

Pâta miso vs Miso Cube Original

Overall, Pâta miso has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 6 of our comparison points versus 2.

Nutrition per 100 g

NutrientPâta misoMiso Cube Original
Nutri-Score d —
NOVA group 4 3
Calories 132 kcal 383 kcal
Fat 4.7 g 34 g
Saturated fat 0.6 g 15 g
Sugars 5.5 g 3.2 g
Salt 8.6 g 41.5 g
Fiber 5.7 g 3.3 g
Protein 11 g 6.2 g
Additives20
AllergensGluten, SoybeansGluten

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

Key differences

  • Pâta miso has 66% fewer calories (132 kcal vs 383 kcal).
  • Pâta miso has 86% less fat (4.7 g vs 34 g).
  • Pâta miso has 96% less saturated fat (0.6 g vs 15 g).
  • Miso Cube Original has 42% less sugar (3.2 g vs 5.5 g).
  • Pâta miso has 79% less salt (8.6 g vs 41.5 g).
  • Pâta miso has 42% more fiber (5.7 g vs 3.3 g).
  • Pâta miso has 44% more protein (11 g vs 6.2 g).
  • Miso Cube Original is less processed (lower NOVA group).
  • Only Pâta miso lists: Soybeans.

Ingredients

Pâta miso

Pâte de soja et de riz (eau, fèves de soja, riz, sel), eau, pâte de soja et d'orge (fèves de soja, eau, sel, farine d'orge rôti), alcool, sel, exhausteurs de goût: inosinate disodique, 5-ribonucléotide disodique, extrait de levure.

Miso Cube Original

Sel marin, huiles végétales (beurre de karité, huile de tournesol), Miso (19%) (soja français, orge (gluten), sel marin non raffiné, eau, enzyme (Aspergillus oryzae)), amidon, jus de carotte, épices (coriandre, poivre, macis, noix de muscade), persil.

FAQ

Which is healthier: Pâta miso or Miso Cube Original?

Overall, Pâta miso 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?

Pâta miso has fewer calories: 132 kcal versus 383 kcal per 100 g.

Which has less sugar?

Miso Cube Original has less sugar: 3.2 g versus 5.5 g per 100 g.

More comparisons