Rillettes Bordeau Chesnel Format Familial vs Rillettes du Mans sans graisse ajoutée
Overall, Rillettes du Mans sans graisse ajoutée has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 4 of our comparison points versus 1.
Rillettes Bordeau Chesnel Format Familial
Rillettes du Mans sans graisse ajoutée
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Rillettes Bordeau Chesnel Fo... | Rillettes du Mans sans grais... |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | e | e |
| NOVA group | 3 | 3 |
| Calories | 431 kcal | 345 kcal |
| Fat | 40.5 g | 30.4 g |
| Saturated fat | 15.2 g | 11.6 g |
| Sugars | 0.2 g | 0.5 g |
| Salt | 1.1 g | 1 g |
| Fiber | 0 g | 0.3 g |
| Protein | 16 g | 17.8 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
- Rillettes du Mans sans graisse ajoutée has 20% fewer calories (345 kcal vs 431 kcal).
- Rillettes du Mans sans graisse ajoutée has 25% less fat (30.4 g vs 40.5 g).
- Rillettes du Mans sans graisse ajoutée has 24% less saturated fat (11.6 g vs 15.2 g).
- Rillettes Bordeau Chesnel Format Familial has 60% less sugar (0.2 g vs 0.5 g).
- Rillettes du Mans sans graisse ajoutée has 10% more protein (17.8 g vs 16 g).
Ingredients
Rillettes Bordeau Chesnel Format Familial
Viande de porc (96%), gras de porc, sel, poivre.
Rillettes du Mans sans graisse ajoutée
Viande de porc, sel, poivre
FAQ
Which is healthier: Rillettes Bordeau Chesnel Format Familial or Rillettes du Mans sans graisse ajoutée?
Overall, Rillettes du Mans sans graisse ajoutée 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?
Rillettes du Mans sans graisse ajoutée has fewer calories: 345 kcal versus 431 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Rillettes Bordeau Chesnel Format Familial has less sugar: 0.2 g versus 0.5 g per 100 g.