Comparison

Poulet et citron confit en terrine vs Terrine à l'ail des ours

Overall, Poulet et citron confit en terrine has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 3 of our comparison points versus 1.

Nutrition per 100 g

NutrientPoulet et citron confit en t...Terrine à l'ail des ours
Nutri-Score d d
NOVA group 3 3
Calories 138 kcal 189 kcal
Fat 7.7 g 12.2 g
Saturated fat 2.8 g 3.6 g
Sugars 0.3 g 0.2 g
Salt 1.7 g 1.5 g
Fiber — 0 g
Protein 13 g 16.8 g
Additives00
AllergensEggs, Milk, Lait, Œuf*None listed

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

Key differences

  • Poulet et citron confit en terrine has 27% fewer calories (138 kcal vs 189 kcal).
  • Poulet et citron confit en terrine has 37% less fat (7.7 g vs 12.2 g).
  • Poulet et citron confit en terrine has 22% less saturated fat (2.8 g vs 3.6 g).
  • Terrine à l'ail des ours has 23% more protein (16.8 g vs 13 g).
  • Only Poulet et citron confit en terrine lists: Eggs, Milk, Lait, Œuf*.

Ingredients

Poulet et citron confit en terrine

Poulet* (viande de poulet* (25%), foie de poulet*, peau de poulet*), pomme de terre*, crème fraîche (lait)*, carotte*, œuf*, citron confit (3,05%)*, sel de Guérande, poivre*. *Issus de l'agriculture biologique

Terrine à l'ail des ours

Viande de poulet 50% (France), peau de volaille 20% (France), foie de volaille, CEUFS, ail des ours (2%), sel, amidon de maïs, ail, poivre, épices Rabelais.

FAQ

Which is healthier: Poulet et citron confit en terrine or Terrine à l'ail des ours?

Overall, Poulet et citron confit en terrine 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?

Poulet et citron confit en terrine has fewer calories: 138 kcal versus 189 kcal per 100 g.

Which has less sugar?

Terrine à l'ail des ours has less sugar: 0.2 g versus 0.3 g per 100 g.

More comparisons