Comparison

Power Balls vs Bio-Obstriegel - Banane-Maracuja

Overall, Bio-Obstriegel - Banane-Maracuja has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 3 of our comparison points versus 2.

Nutrition per 100 g

NutrientPower BallsBio-Obstriegel - Banane-Mara...
Nutri-Score — d
NOVA group 4 3
Calories 351 kcal 337 kcal
Fat 8.8 g 5 g
Saturated fat 3.2 g 0.5 g
Sugars 47 g 48 g
Salt — 0 g
Fiber 11 g 5.2 g
Protein 5.8 g 4.3 g
Additives00
AllergensGluten, NutsGluten, Nuts

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

Key differences

  • Bio-Obstriegel - Banane-Maracuja has 43% less fat (5 g vs 8.8 g).
  • Bio-Obstriegel - Banane-Maracuja has 84% less saturated fat (0.5 g vs 3.2 g).
  • Power Balls has 53% more fiber (11 g vs 5.2 g).
  • Power Balls has 26% more protein (5.8 g vs 4.3 g).
  • Bio-Obstriegel - Banane-Maracuja is less processed (lower NOVA group).

Ingredients

Power Balls

Datteln, Cashewkerne, getrocknete Saure Kirsche, Kakao-Nibs, gefriertgetrockneter Früchte-Mix (Himbeeren, Preiselbeeren, rote Johannisbeeren), Hafermehl, Haferflocken, Salz, natürliche Aroma (Himbeere, Preiselbeeren)

Bio-Obstriegel - Banane-Maracuja

Apfelsaftkonzentrat (28 %), getrocknete Apfelstücke (20 %), Hafervollkornflocken, Rosinen (10 %), Bananenflocken (8 %), Honig, zerkleinerte Mandeln, Maracujasaftkonzentrat (3 %), Maisstärke, Kartoffelstärke. Kann Spuren von Milch, Erdnüssen, Soja, anderen Schalenfrüchten und Sesamsamen enthalten.

FAQ

Which is healthier: Power Balls or Bio-Obstriegel - Banane-Maracuja?

Overall, Bio-Obstriegel - Banane-Maracuja 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?

Bio-Obstriegel - Banane-Maracuja has fewer calories: 337 kcal versus 351 kcal per 100 g.

Which has less sugar?

Power Balls has less sugar: 47 g versus 48 g per 100 g.

More comparisons