Préparation pour sandwich vs Filetes de melva en aceite de oliva
Overall, Filetes de melva en aceite de oliva has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 6 of our comparison points versus 0.
Préparation pour sandwich
Filetes de melva en aceite de oliva
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Préparation pour sandwich | Filetes de melva en aceite d... |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | b | a |
| NOVA group | — | 3 |
| Calories | 203 kcal | 178 kcal |
| Fat | 15 g | 8.3 g |
| Saturated fat | 1.5 g | 1.4 g |
| Sugars | 1.1 g | 0.5 g |
| Salt | 0.9 g | 1 g |
| Protein | 13 g | 24.7 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
- Filetes de melva en aceite de oliva has 12% fewer calories (178 kcal vs 203 kcal).
- Filetes de melva en aceite de oliva has 45% less fat (8.3 g vs 15 g).
- Filetes de melva en aceite de oliva has 55% less sugar (0.5 g vs 1.1 g).
- Filetes de melva en aceite de oliva has 47% more protein (24.7 g vs 13 g).
- Filetes de melva en aceite de oliva has the better Nutri-Score.
Ingredients
Préparation pour sandwich
filet de saumon rose du pacifique huile de colza butternut eau oeuf oignon tomates mi-sechees jus de saumon wakame jus de citron fibre de chicorée, de lin et d'agrumes farine de riz gingembre sel thym citron épices poivre
Filetes de melva en aceite de oliva
Melva (66%), aceite de oliva (33%) y sal.
FAQ
Which is healthier: Préparation pour sandwich or Filetes de melva en aceite de oliva?
Overall, Filetes de melva en aceite de oliva 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?
Filetes de melva en aceite de oliva has fewer calories: 178 kcal versus 203 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Filetes de melva en aceite de oliva has less sugar: 0.5 g versus 1.1 g per 100 g.