Pindkaas extra smeuïg vs Twinkelz vlokken puur
Overall, Pindkaas extra smeuïg has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 5 of our comparison points versus 3.
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Pindkaas extra smeuïg | Twinkelz vlokken puur |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | d | e |
| NOVA group | 3 | 4 |
| Calories | 646 kcal | 450 kcal |
| Fat | 56 g | 16 g |
| Saturated fat | 8.7 g | 8.9 g |
| Sugars | 4.8 g | 65 g |
| Salt | 0.6 g | 0.2 g |
| Fiber | — | 6.7 g |
| Protein | 23 g | 5.2 g |
| Additives | 0 | 1 |
| Allergens | Peanuts, Soybeans | Milk |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Twinkelz vlokken puur has 30% fewer calories (450 kcal vs 646 kcal).
- Twinkelz vlokken puur has 71% less fat (16 g vs 56 g).
- Pindkaas extra smeuïg has 93% less sugar (4.8 g vs 65 g).
- Twinkelz vlokken puur has 73% less salt (0.2 g vs 0.6 g).
- Pindkaas extra smeuïg has 77% more protein (23 g vs 5.2 g).
- Pindkaas extra smeuïg has the better Nutri-Score.
- Pindkaas extra smeuïg is less processed (lower NOVA group).
- Only Pindkaas extra smeuïg lists: Peanuts, Soybeans.
- Only Twinkelz vlokken puur lists: Milk.
Ingredients
Pindkaas extra smeuïg
Pinda's (85%), plantaardige oliën (pinda, raapzaad, soja), geheel gehard palmvet, zout, Dit product wordt geproduceerd in een bedrijf waar ook noten worden verwerkt,
Twinkelz vlokken puur
suiker, cacaomassa, magere cacaopoeder, emulgator: lecithinen (raapzaad), cacaoboter, volle _melkpoeder_,
FAQ
Which is healthier: Pindkaas extra smeuïg or Twinkelz vlokken puur?
Overall, Pindkaas extra smeuïg 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?
Twinkelz vlokken puur has fewer calories: 450 kcal versus 646 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Pindkaas extra smeuïg has less sugar: 4.8 g versus 65 g per 100 g.