Soft caramel and crisped rice in milk chocolate bar vs Protochoc bar
Overall, Protochoc bar has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 5 of our comparison points versus 2.
Soft caramel and crisped rice in milk chocolate bar
Protochoc bar
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Soft caramel and crisped ric... | Protochoc bar |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | e | d |
| NOVA group | — | — |
| Calories | 511 kcal | 448 kcal |
| Fat | 26.7 g | 31 g |
| Saturated fat | 6.7 g | 18 g |
| Sugars | 35.6 g | 0.7 g |
| Salt | 0.5 g | 0.5 g |
| Fiber | 2.2 g | — |
| Protein | 8.9 g | 35 g |
| Additives | 0 | 0 |
| Allergens | None listed | None listed |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Protochoc bar has 12% fewer calories (448 kcal vs 511 kcal).
- Soft caramel and crisped rice in milk chocolate bar has 14% less fat (26.7 g vs 31 g).
- Soft caramel and crisped rice in milk chocolate bar has 63% less saturated fat (6.7 g vs 18 g).
- Protochoc bar has 98% less sugar (0.7 g vs 35.6 g).
- Protochoc bar has 75% more protein (35 g vs 8.9 g).
- Protochoc bar has the better Nutri-Score.
Ingredients
Soft caramel and crisped rice in milk chocolate bar
470 19* mn ay per big reference intaka % per 100g valor diario % por 100g per 50g valeur quotidienné % par 100g 24
Protochoc bar
Quant per Quant. per 190g 35g ESFR NL MITTLERE NÄHRWERT/AVERAGE NUTRITIONAL VALUES PER/VALORES NUTRICIONALES MEDIOS PARA/VALERS JUTRITION MOYENNES POUR/
FAQ
Which is healthier: Soft caramel and crisped rice in milk chocolate bar or Protochoc bar?
Overall, Protochoc bar 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?
Protochoc bar has fewer calories: 448 kcal versus 511 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Protochoc bar has less sugar: 0.7 g versus 35.6 g per 100 g.