Comparison

Spécialité praliné Pâtissier vs LANVIN l'Escargot Duo Lait Noir 362g

Overall, LANVIN l'Escargot Duo Lait Noir 362g has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 2 of our comparison points versus 1.

Nutrition per 100 g

NutrientSpécialité praliné PâtissierLANVIN l'Escargot Duo Lait N...
Nutri-Score e e
NOVA group 4 4
Calories 560 kcal 560 kcal
Fat 36.3 g 35.3 g
Saturated fat 14.4 g 12.9 g
Sugars 44.4 g 48.1 g
Salt 0.1 g 0.1 g
Fiber 3.6 g 4.4 g
Protein 9.2 g 7.3 g
Additives11
AllergensMilk, NutsMilk, Nuts

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

Key differences

  • LANVIN l'Escargot Duo Lait Noir 362g has 10% less saturated fat (12.9 g vs 14.4 g).
  • LANVIN l'Escargot Duo Lait Noir 362g has 18% more fiber (4.4 g vs 3.6 g).
  • Spécialité praliné Pâtissier has 21% more protein (9.2 g vs 7.3 g).

Ingredients

Spécialité praliné Pâtissier

praline 50% (nuts, sugar), sugar, cocoa butter, skimmed milk powder, cocoa paste, whole milk powder, emulsifier: lecithins (sunflower), traces of other nuts and gluten,

LANVIN l'Escargot Duo Lait Noir 362g

Sucre, NOISETTES, pâte de cacao*, beurre de cacao*, AMANDES, LAIT entier en poudre, BEURRE pâtissier, LAIT écrémé en poudre, émulsifiant (lécithines), arômes naturels de vanille. 23% d'amandes et de noisettes. *Bilan massique certifié Rainforest Alliance www.ra.org/fr. Peut contenir : OEUFS, GLUTEN, AUTRES FRUITS A COQUE.

FAQ

Which is healthier: Spécialité praliné Pâtissier or LANVIN l'Escargot Duo Lait Noir 362g?

Overall, LANVIN l'Escargot Duo Lait Noir 362g 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?

Spécialité praliné Pâtissier has fewer calories: 560 kcal versus 560 kcal per 100 g.

Which has less sugar?

Spécialité praliné Pâtissier has less sugar: 44.4 g versus 48.1 g per 100 g.

More comparisons