Comparison

Signaturbrød Gillelejehavn vs Fanø Rugbrød

Overall, Signaturbrød Gillelejehavn has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 6 of our comparison points versus 1.

Nutrition per 100 g

NutrientSignaturbrød GillelejehavnFanø Rugbrød
Nutri-Score b c
NOVA group 3 3
Calories 214 kcal 331 kcal
Fat 4.7 g 10 g
Saturated fat 0.6 g 1 g
Sugars 2 g 4.6 g
Salt 1.6 g 1.3 g
Fiber 9 g 8.9 g
Protein 6.4 g 6.4 g
Additives00
AllergensGlutenGluten

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

Key differences

  • Signaturbrød Gillelejehavn has 35% fewer calories (214 kcal vs 331 kcal).
  • Signaturbrød Gillelejehavn has 53% less fat (4.7 g vs 10 g).
  • Signaturbrød Gillelejehavn has 40% less saturated fat (0.6 g vs 1 g).
  • Signaturbrød Gillelejehavn has 57% less sugar (2 g vs 4.6 g).
  • Fanø Rugbrød has 20% less salt (1.3 g vs 1.6 g).
  • Signaturbrød Gillelejehavn has the better Nutri-Score.

Ingredients

Signaturbrød Gillelejehavn

Vand, _rugkerner_, _fuldkornsrugmel_ 20%, poppede durumkerner (_hvede_) 6%, solsikkekerner, _bygmaltekstrakt_, hørfrø, salt tilsat jod, gær, eddike, sigtet _rugmel_, rapsolie, solsikkeolie, _bygmaltmel_, enzymer (_hvede_), surdejskultur.

Fanø Rugbrød

Vand, sigtet rugmel 26%, fuldkornsrugmel 12%, solsikkekerner 12%, rugkerner 10%, bygmaltekstrakt, sirup, sukker, salt tilsat jod, havtornpuré 1,2%, eddike, gær, græskarkerner, rapsolie, sort peber, bygmaltmel, enzymer (hvede), surdejskultur.

FAQ

Which is healthier: Signaturbrød Gillelejehavn or Fanø Rugbrød?

Overall, Signaturbrød Gillelejehavn 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?

Signaturbrød Gillelejehavn has fewer calories: 214 kcal versus 331 kcal per 100 g.

Which has less sugar?

Signaturbrød Gillelejehavn has less sugar: 2 g versus 4.6 g per 100 g.

More comparisons