Comparison

Saucisson sec à la Tomme de Montagne vs Saucisson sec de Savoie Beaufort AOP

Overall, Saucisson sec de Savoie Beaufort AOP has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 2 of our comparison points versus 0.

Nutrition per 100 g

NutrientSaucisson sec à la Tomme de...Saucisson sec de Savoie Beau...
Nutri-Score e e
NOVA group 4 4
Calories 395 kcal 418 kcal
Fat 32 g 34 g
Saturated fat 15 g 13 g
Sugars 1.7 g 1 g
Salt 4.9 g 4.5 g
Fiber 0 g —
Protein 25 g 26 g
Additives21
AllergensMilkMilk

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

Key differences

  • Saucisson sec de Savoie Beaufort AOP has 13% less saturated fat (13 g vs 15 g).
  • Saucisson sec de Savoie Beaufort AOP has 41% less sugar (1 g vs 1.7 g).

Ingredients

Saucisson sec à la Tomme de Montagne

Viande de porc (origine: France), tomme de montagne 8,5% (lait de vache, sel, présure animale, ferments lactiques), sel, lactose, dextrose, épices, ail, antioxydant: érythorbate de sodium, conservateur: nitrate de potassium, ferments.

Saucisson sec de Savoie Beaufort AOP

Viande de porc origine France (155 g mis en œuvre pour 100 g de produit fini), BEAUFORT AOP LAIT de vache - sel-presure - ferments lactiques (5,5 g mis en œuvre pour 100 g de produit fini), LACTOSE, sel, saccharose, dextrose, épices et lante aromatique, conservateurs: nitrate de potassium-nitrite de sodium, ferments. Boyau naturel de porc.

FAQ

Which is healthier: Saucisson sec à la Tomme de Montagne or Saucisson sec de Savoie Beaufort AOP?

Overall, Saucisson sec de Savoie Beaufort AOP 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 sec à la Tomme de Montagne has fewer calories: 395 kcal versus 418 kcal per 100 g.

Which has less sugar?

Saucisson sec de Savoie Beaufort AOP has less sugar: 1 g versus 1.7 g per 100 g.

More comparisons