Soft White vs White Ciabattin
Overall, White Ciabattin has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 7 of our comparison points versus 0.
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Soft White | White Ciabattin |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | c | b |
| NOVA group | 4 | 3 |
| Calories | 233 kcal | 230 kcal |
| Fat | 1.7 g | 0.8 g |
| Saturated fat | 0.3 g | 0.1 g |
| Sugars | 3.5 g | 2.4 g |
| Salt | 0.9 g | 0.9 g |
| Fiber | 2.4 g | 2.9 g |
| Protein | 8.7 g | 10.1 g |
| Additives | 5 | 0 |
| Allergens | Gluten, Soybeans | Gluten |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- White Ciabattin has 53% less fat (0.8 g vs 1.7 g).
- White Ciabattin has 31% less sugar (2.4 g vs 3.5 g).
- White Ciabattin has 17% more fiber (2.9 g vs 2.4 g).
- White Ciabattin has 14% more protein (10.1 g vs 8.7 g).
- White Ciabattin has the better Nutri-Score.
- White Ciabattin is less processed (lower NOVA group).
- Only Soft White lists: Soybeans.
Ingredients
Soft White
_Wheat_ Flour (with added Calcium, Iron, Niacin, Thiamin), Water, Yeast, _Soya_ Flour, Salt, Preservative (E282), Emulsifiers (E472e, E471, E481), Flour Treatment Agent (Ascorbic Acid).
White Ciabattin
Wheat Flour (Wheat Flour, Calcium Carbonate, Iron, Niacin, Thiamin), Water, Salt, Fermented Wheat Flour.
FAQ
Which is healthier: Soft White or White Ciabattin?
Overall, White Ciabattin 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?
White Ciabattin has fewer calories: 230 kcal versus 233 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
White Ciabattin has less sugar: 2.4 g versus 3.5 g per 100 g.