Sweet relish vs Mango Chutney
Overall, Sweet relish has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 7 of our comparison points versus 3.
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Sweet relish | Mango Chutney |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | a | e |
| NOVA group | 4 | 3 |
| Calories | 20 kcal | 257 kcal |
| Fat | 0 g | 0.8 g |
| Saturated fat | 0 g | 0.6 g |
| Sugars | 4 g | 55 g |
| Salt | 0.3 g | 1.9 g |
| Fiber | 0 g | 1.3 g |
| Protein | 0 g | 0.4 g |
| Additives | 1 | 1 |
| Allergens | None listed | None listed |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Sweet relish has 92% fewer calories (20 kcal vs 257 kcal).
- Sweet relish has no fat, while Mango Chutney has 0.8 g.
- Sweet relish has no saturated fat, while Mango Chutney has 0.6 g.
- Sweet relish has 93% less sugar (4 g vs 55 g).
- Sweet relish has 84% less salt (0.3 g vs 1.9 g).
- Mango Chutney has 100% more fiber (1.3 g vs 0 g).
- Mango Chutney has 100% more protein (0.4 g vs 0 g).
- Sweet relish has the better Nutri-Score.
- Mango Chutney is less processed (lower NOVA group).
Ingredients
Sweet relish
Organic cucumbers, organic sugar, water, organic vinegar, Sea salt, organic dehydrated red bell pepper, xanthum gum, calcium chloride (firming agent), organic gum Arabic, organic natural flavors, organic tumeric (for color)
Mango Chutney
56% mango, sugar, salt, acidity regulator: acetic acid, whole garlic cloves, cumin seeds, chilli powder, fenugreek seeds, nigella seeds, black pepper, green cardamom, whole cloves.
FAQ
Which is healthier: Sweet relish or Mango Chutney?
Overall, Sweet relish 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?
Sweet relish has fewer calories: 20 kcal versus 257 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Sweet relish has less sugar: 4 g versus 55 g per 100 g.