Comparison

Roomboter Stroopkoeken vs Spelt Fruitkoek

Overall, Spelt Fruitkoek has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 7 of our comparison points versus 0.

Nutrition per 100 g

NutrientRoomboter StroopkoekenSpelt Fruitkoek
Nutri-Score e d
NOVA group 4 3
Calories 465 kcal 439 kcal
Fat 20 g 18 g
Saturated fat 13 g 7.9 g
Sugars 28 g 29 g
Salt 0.7 g 0.2 g
Fiber — 7.2 g
Protein 5.5 g 7.7 g
Additives32
AllergensEggs, Gluten, Milk, SoybeansGluten

Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).

Key differences

  • Spelt Fruitkoek has 10% less fat (18 g vs 20 g).
  • Spelt Fruitkoek has 39% less saturated fat (7.9 g vs 13 g).
  • Spelt Fruitkoek has 77% less salt (0.2 g vs 0.7 g).
  • Spelt Fruitkoek has 29% more protein (7.7 g vs 5.5 g).
  • Spelt Fruitkoek has the better Nutri-Score.
  • Spelt Fruitkoek is less processed (lower NOVA group).
  • Only Roomboter Stroopkoeken lists: Eggs, Milk, Soybeans.

Ingredients

Roomboter Stroopkoeken

Tarwebloen, 24% glucose - fructosestroop, 24% roomoter, suiker, oligo - fructose, stabilisator (sorbital, E422), sojameel, weipoeder, rijsmiddel (E500), emulgator (sojalecithine), tarwezetmeel, magere melkpoeder, scharrelei, gekaramelliseerde suiker, zout, kaneel, aroma, Bourbonvanille, kleurstof (caroteen).

Spelt Fruitkoek

volkoren _spelt_meel*, rozijnen*, palmolie* (ongehard), mais* - gerstmoutstroop*, _haver_vlokken*, rijststroop*, cranberries*, appeldiksap*, dadelstroop*, kaneeel*, rijsmiddel (natriumbicarbonaat), zout

FAQ

Which is healthier: Roomboter Stroopkoeken or Spelt Fruitkoek?

Overall, Spelt Fruitkoek 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?

Spelt Fruitkoek has fewer calories: 439 kcal versus 465 kcal per 100 g.

Which has less sugar?

Roomboter Stroopkoeken has less sugar: 28 g versus 29 g per 100 g.

More comparisons