Comparison

Salted Caramel vs Mars Mini

Overall, Mars Mini has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 3 of our comparison points versus 1.

Nutrition per 100 g

NutrientSalted CaramelMars Mini
Nutri-Score e e
NOVA group 4 4
Calories 491 kcal 439 kcal
Fat 24 g 15 g
Saturated fat 14 g 6.7 g
Sugars 49 g 62 g
Salt 0.8 g 0.7 g
Fiber 1.8 g —
Protein 4.3 g 4.2 g
Additives12
AllergensGluten, Milk, Soybeans, MageremelkpoederEggs, Gluten, Milk, Soybeans, Lait, Lécithine de soja, Malt d'orge

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

Key differences

  • Mars Mini has 11% fewer calories (439 kcal vs 491 kcal).
  • Mars Mini has 38% less fat (15 g vs 24 g).
  • Mars Mini has 52% less saturated fat (6.7 g vs 14 g).
  • Salted Caramel has 21% less sugar (49 g vs 62 g).
  • Only Salted Caramel lists: Mageremelkpoeder.
  • Only Mars Mini lists: Eggs, Lait, Lécithine de soja, Malt d'orge.

Ingredients

Salted Caramel

suiker, glucosesiroop, _tarwemeel_, palmvet, cacaoboter, _mageremelkpoeder_, cacaomassa, _lactose_, botervet (_melk_), weipoeder (_melk_), zout, magere cacao, emulgator (_sojalecithine_), rijsmiddel (E500, natuurlijk vanille-extract

Mars Mini

Sucre, sirop de glucose, lait écrémé en poudre, beurre de cacao, pâte de cacao, huile de tournesol, perméat de lactosérum (lait), matière grasse de palme, cacao maigre en poudre, matière grasse du lait, extrait de malt d'orge, sel, émulsifiant (lécithine de soja), blanc d'oeuf en poudre. (Peut contenir: cacahuètes, fruits à coque).

FAQ

Which is healthier: Salted Caramel or Mars Mini?

Overall, Mars Mini 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?

Mars Mini has fewer calories: 439 kcal versus 491 kcal per 100 g.

Which has less sugar?

Salted Caramel has less sugar: 49 g versus 62 g per 100 g.

More comparisons