Comparison

Smokey Tomato @ Chilli Chutney vs Spiced apple and pear chutney

Overall, Smokey Tomato @ Chilli Chutney has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 6 of our comparison points versus 1.

Nutrition per 100 g

NutrientSmokey Tomato @ Chilli Chutn...Spiced apple and pear chutne...
Nutri-Score d e
NOVA group — 4
Calories 178 kcal 231 kcal
Fat 0.5 g 0.1 g
Saturated fat 0.1 g 0.1 g
Sugars 40.5 g 54 g
Salt 1.1 g 1.2 g
Fiber 2.4 g 2 g
Protein 1.5 g 0.4 g
Additives00
AllergensNone listedApple

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

Key differences

  • Smokey Tomato @ Chilli Chutney has 23% fewer calories (178 kcal vs 231 kcal).
  • Spiced apple and pear chutney has 80% less fat (0.1 g vs 0.5 g).
  • Smokey Tomato @ Chilli Chutney has 25% less sugar (40.5 g vs 54 g).
  • Smokey Tomato @ Chilli Chutney has 17% more fiber (2.4 g vs 2 g).
  • Smokey Tomato @ Chilli Chutney has 73% more protein (1.5 g vs 0.4 g).
  • Smokey Tomato @ Chilli Chutney has the better Nutri-Score.
  • Only Spiced apple and pear chutney lists: Apple.

Ingredients

Smokey Tomato @ Chilli Chutney

Not available.

Spiced apple and pear chutney

sugar, apple (29%), pear (11%), onion, cider vinegar, spirit vinegar, sultanas, treacle, ginger purée, salt, dried apple, garlic purée, cinnamon powder, dried onion, ginger powder, allspice, sunflower oil. suitable for vegans storage store in a cool, dry place.

FAQ

Which is healthier: Smokey Tomato @ Chilli Chutney or Spiced apple and pear chutney?

Overall, Smokey Tomato @ Chilli Chutney 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?

Smokey Tomato @ Chilli Chutney has fewer calories: 178 kcal versus 231 kcal per 100 g.

Which has less sugar?

Smokey Tomato @ Chilli Chutney has less sugar: 40.5 g versus 54 g per 100 g.

More comparisons