Sauce basilic 420g vs Pulpe de tomates - 3x400 1/2
Overall, Pulpe de tomates - 3x400 1/2 has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 6 of our comparison points versus 0.
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Sauce basilic 420g | Pulpe de tomates - 3x400 1/2 |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | a | a |
| NOVA group | 4 | 3 |
| Calories | 51 kcal | 23 kcal |
| Fat | 1.3 g | 0.5 g |
| Saturated fat | 0.2 g | 0.1 g |
| Sugars | 6 g | 2.3 g |
| Salt | 0.9 g | 0.1 g |
| Fiber | 1.7 g | 1.7 g |
| Protein | 1 g | 1.4 g |
| Additives | 0 | 1 |
| Allergens | Celery, Gluten, Milk, Mustard, Sesame seeds | None listed |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Pulpe de tomates - 3x400 1/2 has 56% fewer calories (23 kcal vs 51 kcal).
- Pulpe de tomates - 3x400 1/2 has 62% less fat (0.5 g vs 1.3 g).
- Pulpe de tomates - 3x400 1/2 has 62% less sugar (2.3 g vs 6 g).
- Pulpe de tomates - 3x400 1/2 has 86% less salt (0.1 g vs 0.9 g).
- Pulpe de tomates - 3x400 1/2 has 29% more protein (1.4 g vs 1 g).
- Pulpe de tomates - 3x400 1/2 is less processed (lower NOVA group).
- Only Sauce basilic 420g lists: Celery, Gluten, Milk, Mustard, Sesame seeds.
Ingredients
Sauce basilic 420g
Pulpe de tomate 71%, concentré de tomate 14%, oignon, carottes, huile de tournesol, sucre, sel, amidon de mais modifié, basilic 1,4%, arôme naturel.
Pulpe de tomates - 3x400 1/2
Tomates concassées, jus de tomate, sel, acidifiant : acide citrique.
FAQ
Which is healthier: Sauce basilic 420g or Pulpe de tomates - 3x400 1/2?
Overall, Pulpe de tomates - 3x400 1/2 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?
Pulpe de tomates - 3x400 1/2 has fewer calories: 23 kcal versus 51 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Pulpe de tomates - 3x400 1/2 has less sugar: 2.3 g versus 6 g per 100 g.