Comparison
Rinder-Cevapcici vs Cevapcici
Overall, Rinder-Cevapcici has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 3 of our comparison points versus 0.
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Rinder-Cevapcici | Cevapcici |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | e | e |
| NOVA group | 4 | — |
| Calories | 243 kcal | 292 kcal |
| Fat | 19 g | 25 g |
| Saturated fat | 10.1 g | 11 g |
| Sugars | 0.7 g | 0.5 g |
| Salt | 1.4 g | 1.3 g |
| Fiber | — | 0 g |
| Protein | 17 g | 15 g |
| Additives | 2 | 0 |
| Allergens | None listed | None listed |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Rinder-Cevapcici has 17% fewer calories (243 kcal vs 292 kcal).
- Rinder-Cevapcici has 24% less fat (19 g vs 25 g).
- Rinder-Cevapcici has 12% more protein (17 g vs 15 g).
Ingredients
Rinder-Cevapcici
Salz,E300,Gewürz,E160c,Rindfleisch
Cevapcici
Not available.
FAQ
Which is healthier: Rinder-Cevapcici or Cevapcici?
Overall, Rinder-Cevapcici 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?
Rinder-Cevapcici has fewer calories: 243 kcal versus 292 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Cevapcici has less sugar: 0.5 g versus 0.7 g per 100 g.