Comparison

Saucisson à l’ail fumé vs Efepaşa DİLİM Sucuk

Overall, Saucisson à l’ail fumé has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 5 of our comparison points versus 1.

Nutrition per 100 g

NutrientSaucisson à l’ail fuméEfepaşa DİLİM Sucuk
Nutri-Score e e
NOVA group 4 4
Calories 269 kcal 399 kcal
Fat 23 g 34.7 g
Saturated fat 9.9 g 18.2 g
Sugars 0.4 g 0.4 g
Salt 1.9 g 3 g
Fiber 0.5 g 0 g
Protein 15 g 18 g
Additives55
AllergensNone listedNone listed

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

Key differences

  • Saucisson à l’ail fumé has 33% fewer calories (269 kcal vs 399 kcal).
  • Saucisson à l’ail fumé has 34% less fat (23 g vs 34.7 g).
  • Saucisson à l’ail fumé has 46% less saturated fat (9.9 g vs 18.2 g).
  • Saucisson à l’ail fumé has 37% less salt (1.9 g vs 3 g).
  • Saucisson à l’ail fumé has 100% more fiber (0.5 g vs 0 g).
  • Efepaşa DİLİM Sucuk has 17% more protein (18 g vs 15 g).

Ingredients

Saucisson à l’ail fumé

Viande de porc (origine : France) 84%, eau, protéines de sang, sel, ail déshydraté 0,5%, sirop de glucose, dextrose, épices, antioxydant: érythorbate de sodium, acidifiants : lactate de potassium et diacétate de sodium, conservateurs: chlorure de potassium et nitrite de sodium. Fumé au bois de hêtre.

Efepaşa DİLİM Sucuk

115g beef, fat beef, salt, spices, dextrose, e1400, maltodextrin, antioxygéne: e301, flavour enhancer: e621, preservative: e250, medium, acidifying: citric acid, extract of spices, ripening

FAQ

Which is healthier: Saucisson à l’ail fumé or Efepaşa DİLİM Sucuk?

Overall, Saucisson à l’ail fumé 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?

Saucisson à l’ail fumé has fewer calories: 269 kcal versus 399 kcal per 100 g.

Which has less sugar?

Saucisson à l’ail fumé has less sugar: 0.4 g versus 0.4 g per 100 g.

More comparisons