Sandwich jambon serrano vs Natsu Lachs & Ei
Overall, Sandwich jambon serrano has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 1 of our comparison points versus 0.
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Sandwich jambon serrano | Natsu Lachs & Ei |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | c | c |
| NOVA group | — | 4 |
| Calories | 230 kcal | 214 kcal |
| Fat | 8.6 g | 9.4 g |
| Saturated fat | 1 g | 1.1 g |
| Sugars | 1 g | 2.7 g |
| Salt | 1.5 g | 1.3 g |
| Fiber | — | 2.9 g |
| Protein | 9.6 g | 8.8 g |
| Additives | 0 | 7 |
| Allergens | None listed | Eggs, Fish, Gluten, Mustard |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Sandwich jambon serrano has 63% less sugar (1 g vs 2.7 g).
- Only Natsu Lachs & Ei lists: Eggs, Fish, Gluten, Mustard.
Ingredients
Sandwich jambon serrano
Not available.
Natsu Lachs & Ei
48 % Weizenfladen (68 % _Weizenmehl_, Wasser, Rapsöl, Backtriebmittel: Diphosphate, Natriumcarbonate; Dextrose, Säuerungsmittel: Äpfelsäure; Speisesalz), 16 % geräucherter Lachs (_Lachs_, Speisesalz, Rauch), 13 % Senf-Dill-Sauce (44 % Rapsöl, Wasser, 13 % Senf (Wasser, _Senfsaaten_, Branntweinessig, Weißweinessig, Speisesalz, Zucker, Sherryessig, Gewürze), pasteurisiertes _Eigelb_, Zucker, Branntweinessig, Maisstärke, 1,8 % Dill, Speisesalz, Verdickungsmittel: Guarkernmehl; Gewürze), 11 % gekochtes Ei (_Ei_, Wasser, Speisesalz, Säuerungsmittel: Essigsäure, Natriumacetate, Citronensäure), 8% Spinat, 4 % Wasser, modifizierte Kartoffelstärke
FAQ
Which is healthier: Sandwich jambon serrano or Natsu Lachs & Ei?
Overall, Sandwich jambon serrano 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?
Natsu Lachs & Ei has fewer calories: 214 kcal versus 230 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Sandwich jambon serrano has less sugar: 1 g versus 2.7 g per 100 g.