Superhalm vs Essbare Trinkhalme
Overall, Superhalm has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 2 of our comparison points versus 0.
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Superhalm | Essbare Trinkhalme |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | a | a |
| NOVA group | 4 | 4 |
| Calories | 339 kcal | 312 kcal |
| Fat | 1.8 g | 2.3 g |
| Saturated fat | 0.4 g | 0.5 g |
| Sugars | 1.3 g | 1.3 g |
| Salt | 0 g | 0 g |
| Fiber | 5.8 g | 5 g |
| Protein | 20.1 g | 20 g |
| Additives | 3 | 3 |
| Allergens | Eggs, Gluten | Gluten |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Superhalm has 22% less fat (1.8 g vs 2.3 g).
- Superhalm has 14% more fiber (5.8 g vs 5 g).
- Only Superhalm lists: Eggs.
Ingredients
Superhalm
Hartweizengrieß, Weizengluten, Apfelfasern, Säuerungsmittel (Zitronensäure), Maltodextrin, natürliches Aroma, Farbstoff (Pflanzenkohle), Süßungsmittel (Steviolglycoside)
Essbare Trinkhalme
Hartweizengrieß, Weizengluten, Apfelfaser, Säuerungsmittel: Citronensäure; Maltodextrin, natürliches Aroma, Farbstoff: Pflanzenkohle; Süßungsmittel: Steviolglycoside
FAQ
Which is healthier: Superhalm or Essbare Trinkhalme?
Overall, Superhalm 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?
Essbare Trinkhalme has fewer calories: 312 kcal versus 339 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Superhalm has less sugar: 1.3 g versus 1.3 g per 100 g.