Sauce chiltepin vs Lio huile de table
Neither product is clearly better overall — it depends on what matters most to you.
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Sauce chiltepin | Lio huile de table |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | e | b |
| NOVA group | 4 | — |
| Calories | 197 kcal | 900 kcal |
| Fat | 18 g | 100 g |
| Saturated fat | 12 g | 14 g |
| Sugars | 4.2 g | 0 g |
| Salt | 2.1 g | 0 g |
| Protein | 2.8 g | 0 g |
| Additives | 1 | 0 |
| Allergens | None listed | None listed |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Sauce chiltepin has 78% fewer calories (197 kcal vs 900 kcal).
- Sauce chiltepin has 82% less fat (18 g vs 100 g).
- Sauce chiltepin has 14% less saturated fat (12 g vs 14 g).
- Lio huile de table has no sugar, while Sauce chiltepin has 4.2 g.
- Lio huile de table has no salt, while Sauce chiltepin has 2.1 g.
- Sauce chiltepin has 100% more protein (2.8 g vs 0 g).
- Lio huile de table has the better Nutri-Score.
Ingredients
Sauce chiltepin
Chiltepin, purified water, xanthan gum, sodium benzonate as a preservative and seasonings.
Lio huile de table
lio Huile de table A ingredients: Huiles vegetales (Soja), Vitamine A, Vitamine 9 Valeurs nutritionnelles 1999 Veleur Energétique (Koa) 999 100 Acides gras saturés (g) 14 Acides gras monoinsaturés (g) 24 Acides gras polyinsaturés (g) 62 0 Glucide 0 3099 Vitamine 03 (1) 300 Lio Produit: HSB التنقية في : رقم Raffinée à : Agadi MAHGO 26.522.19 ليو منتوج التوضيب في : Conditionnée : MAHCO 25.84 19 2 Litres القيمة الغذائية FEE R
FAQ
Which is healthier: Sauce chiltepin or Lio huile de table?
Neither product is clearly better overall — it depends on what matters most to you. 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 chiltepin has fewer calories: 197 kcal versus 900 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Lio huile de table has less sugar: 0 g versus 4.2 g per 100 g.