Paté di olive taggiasche vs Paté di olive riviera biologiche
Overall, Paté di olive taggiasche has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 5 of our comparison points versus 1.
Paté di olive taggiasche
Paté di olive riviera biologiche
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Paté di olive taggiasche | Paté di olive riviera biolog... |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | e | e |
| NOVA group | 3 | 3 |
| Calories | 279 kcal | 399 kcal |
| Fat | 28.7 g | 40.4 g |
| Saturated fat | 4.5 g | 5.5 g |
| Sugars | 1.5 g | 2 g |
| Salt | 3.5 g | 2.8 g |
| Fiber | 3 g | — |
| Protein | 2.1 g | 1.7 g |
| Additives | 1 | 1 |
| Allergens | None listed | None listed |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Paté di olive taggiasche has 30% fewer calories (279 kcal vs 399 kcal).
- Paté di olive taggiasche has 29% less fat (28.7 g vs 40.4 g).
- Paté di olive taggiasche has 18% less saturated fat (4.5 g vs 5.5 g).
- Paté di olive taggiasche has 26% less sugar (1.5 g vs 2 g).
- Paté di olive riviera biologiche has 20% less salt (2.8 g vs 3.5 g).
- Paté di olive taggiasche has 19% more protein (2.1 g vs 1.7 g).
Ingredients
Paté di olive taggiasche
Olive taggiasche denocciolate 90% (Olive Taggiasche, sale), olio extra vergine di oliva da olive Taggiasche, correttore di acidità: acido citrico
Paté di olive riviera biologiche
Olive nere in salamoia snocciolate 90%, olio extra vergine di oliva biologico 9%, sale, correttore di acidità: acido citrico
FAQ
Which is healthier: Paté di olive taggiasche or Paté di olive riviera biologiche?
Overall, Paté di olive taggiasche 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?
Paté di olive taggiasche has fewer calories: 279 kcal versus 399 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Paté di olive taggiasche has less sugar: 1.5 g versus 2 g per 100 g.