Pollen de fleurs en pelote vs Stuifmeelkorrels
Overall, Pollen de fleurs en pelote has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 3 of our comparison points versus 0.
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Pollen de fleurs en pelote | Stuifmeelkorrels |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | d | d |
| NOVA group | 1 | — |
| Calories | 394 kcal | 390 kcal |
| Fat | 7 g | 7 g |
| Saturated fat | 1.5 g | 2 g |
| Sugars | 41.6 g | 40 g |
| Salt | 0 g | 0 g |
| Fiber | 11.5 g | 10 g |
| Protein | 22.8 g | 17 g |
| Additives | 0 | 0 |
| Allergens | None listed | None listed |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Pollen de fleurs en pelote has 25% less saturated fat (1.5 g vs 2 g).
- Pollen de fleurs en pelote has 13% more fiber (11.5 g vs 10 g).
- Pollen de fleurs en pelote has 25% more protein (22.8 g vs 17 g).
Ingredients
Pollen de fleurs en pelote
Pollen de fleurs.
Stuifmeelkorrels
Stuifmeelkorrels
FAQ
Which is healthier: Pollen de fleurs en pelote or Stuifmeelkorrels?
Overall, Pollen de fleurs en pelote 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?
Stuifmeelkorrels has fewer calories: 390 kcal versus 394 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Stuifmeelkorrels has less sugar: 40 g versus 41.6 g per 100 g.