Salame di cavallo Ticino vs Warcollier
Overall, Warcollier has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 3 of our comparison points versus 1.
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Salame di cavallo Ticino | Warcollier |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | e | e |
| NOVA group | 4 | 4 |
| Calories | 368 kcal | 365 kcal |
| Fat | 30.7 g | 22.5 g |
| Saturated fat | 13.3 g | 9.2 g |
| Sugars | 0 g | 0.7 g |
| Salt | 4.3 g | 4.6 g |
| Protein | 22 g | 38.8 g |
| Additives | 1 | 1 |
| Allergens | None listed | Gluten |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Warcollier has 27% less fat (22.5 g vs 30.7 g).
- Warcollier has 31% less saturated fat (9.2 g vs 13.3 g).
- Salame di cavallo Ticino has no sugar, while Warcollier has 0.7 g.
- Warcollier has 43% more protein (38.8 g vs 22 g).
- Only Warcollier lists: Gluten.
Ingredients
Salame di cavallo Ticino
Carne di Equino 68%, Carne di Suino (ORIGINE: 100% ITALIANO), sale. aromi, spezie, destrosio, arami naturali. Antiossidante E301 Conservante E252-E250.
Warcollier
lukanka from veal , horse meat ingredients: dry salami, made by 50% veal and 50% horse meat, salt, sugar, natural spices, preservative-rosemary extract and potassium nitrate, antioxidant - ascorbic acid, natural product free of gmo, gluten and meat substitutes, 100g ready product are made by 182g fresh meat, casing-inedible, storage conditions: 0° 8°c
FAQ
Which is healthier: Salame di cavallo Ticino or Warcollier?
Overall, Warcollier 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?
Warcollier has fewer calories: 365 kcal versus 368 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Salame di cavallo Ticino has less sugar: 0 g versus 0.7 g per 100 g.