Sauce apéritif tomate & piment vs Sauce aperitif echalote et ciboulette
Overall, Sauce apéritif tomate & piment has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 3 of our comparison points versus 0.
Sauce apéritif tomate & piment
Sauce aperitif echalote et ciboulette
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Sauce apéritif tomate & pime... | Sauce aperitif echalote et c... |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | d | e |
| NOVA group | 4 | 4 |
| Calories | 462 kcal | 462 kcal |
| Fat | 48.5 g | 48.5 g |
| Saturated fat | 11.9 g | 11.9 g |
| Sugars | 4.1 g | 4.1 g |
| Salt | 1 g | 1 g |
| Fiber | 1.7 g | 0.3 g |
| Protein | 1.4 g | 1.4 g |
| Additives | 2 | 2 |
| Allergens | None listed | Eggs, Milk |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Sauce apéritif tomate & piment has 80% more fiber (1.7 g vs 0.3 g).
- Sauce apéritif tomate & piment has the better Nutri-Score.
- Only Sauce aperitif echalote et ciboulette lists: Eggs, Milk.
Ingredients
Sauce apéritif tomate & piment
Tomates 64%, concentré de tomate 10%, oignons, huile d'olive vierge extra, poivrons rouges, poivrons verts, sucre, ail, sel, piment de Cayenne 0,2%, gommes xanthane et guar, huile de tournesol, poivre, jus concentré de citron.
Sauce aperitif echalote et ciboulette
Huile de tournesol, lait, échalote 9,8%, vinaigre d'alcool, ciboulette 2,5%, sucre, jaune d'oeuf, sel, gommes de xanthane et de guar, jus concentré de citron.
FAQ
Which is healthier: Sauce apéritif tomate & piment or Sauce aperitif echalote et ciboulette?
Overall, Sauce apéritif tomate & piment 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?
Sauce apéritif tomate & piment has fewer calories: 462 kcal versus 462 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Sauce apéritif tomate & piment has less sugar: 4.1 g versus 4.1 g per 100 g.