Raw Walnut Butter With Cashews vs Organic Raw Walnut Butter 250g
Overall, Organic Raw Walnut Butter 250g has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 5 of our comparison points versus 4.
Raw Walnut Butter With Cashews
Organic Raw Walnut Butter 250g
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Raw Walnut Butter With Cashe... | Organic Raw Walnut Butter 25... |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | a | b |
| NOVA group | 2 | 1 |
| Calories | 641 kcal | 220 kcal |
| Fat | 59.4 g | 21 g |
| Saturated fat | 6.3 g | 3 g |
| Sugars | 3.1 g | 1 g |
| Salt | 0 g | 0 g |
| Fiber | 6.2 g | 0 g |
| Protein | 15.6 g | 5 g |
| Additives | 0 | 0 |
| Allergens | Nuts | Nuts |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Organic Raw Walnut Butter 250g has 66% fewer calories (220 kcal vs 641 kcal).
- Organic Raw Walnut Butter 250g has 65% less fat (21 g vs 59.4 g).
- Organic Raw Walnut Butter 250g has 52% less saturated fat (3 g vs 6.3 g).
- Organic Raw Walnut Butter 250g has 68% less sugar (1 g vs 3.1 g).
- Raw Walnut Butter With Cashews has 100% more fiber (6.2 g vs 0 g).
- Raw Walnut Butter With Cashews has 68% more protein (15.6 g vs 5 g).
- Raw Walnut Butter With Cashews has the better Nutri-Score.
- Organic Raw Walnut Butter 250g is less processed (lower NOVA group).
Ingredients
Raw Walnut Butter With Cashews
Organic raw walnuts, organic raw cashews.
Organic Raw Walnut Butter 250g
100% ORGANIC _WALNUTS_
FAQ
Which is healthier: Raw Walnut Butter With Cashews or Organic Raw Walnut Butter 250g?
Overall, Organic Raw Walnut Butter 250g 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?
Organic Raw Walnut Butter 250g has fewer calories: 220 kcal versus 641 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Organic Raw Walnut Butter 250g has less sugar: 1 g versus 3.1 g per 100 g.