Rollmops vs Rollmops
Overall, Rollmops has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 5 of our comparison points versus 3.
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Rollmops | Rollmops |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | e | d |
| NOVA group | 4 | — |
| Calories | 152 kcal | 122 kcal |
| Fat | 10.3 g | 6.8 g |
| Saturated fat | 1.7 g | 2.4 g |
| Sugars | 0.1 g | 0.5 g |
| Salt | 3.8 g | 2.1 g |
| Protein | 14.8 g | 13 g |
| Additives | 1 | 0 |
| Allergens | Fish, Mustard | None listed |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Rollmops has 20% fewer calories (122 kcal vs 152 kcal).
- Rollmops has 34% less fat (6.8 g vs 10.3 g).
- Rollmops has 29% less saturated fat (1.7 g vs 2.4 g).
- Rollmops has 80% less sugar (0.1 g vs 0.5 g).
- Rollmops has 44% less salt (2.1 g vs 3.8 g).
- Rollmops has 12% more protein (14.8 g vs 13 g).
- Rollmops has the better Nutri-Score.
- Only Rollmops lists: Fish, Mustard.
Ingredients
Rollmops
Rollmops 50% (Heringsfilet 80%, Gurke 20%), Trinkwasser, Branntweinessig, Speisesalz, Senfkörner, Zwiebeln, Aroma, Süßungsmittel: Natriumsaccharin.
Rollmops
Not available.
FAQ
Which is healthier: Rollmops or Rollmops?
Overall, Rollmops 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?
Rollmops has fewer calories: 122 kcal versus 152 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Rollmops has less sugar: 0.1 g versus 0.5 g per 100 g.