Terrine de Cerf au Cognac vs Terrine de cerf à l'Armagnac
Overall, Terrine de cerf à l'Armagnac has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 6 of our comparison points versus 0.
Terrine de Cerf au Cognac
Terrine de cerf à l'Armagnac
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Terrine de Cerf au Cognac | Terrine de cerf à l'Armagnac |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | e | d |
| NOVA group | 4 | 4 |
| Calories | 283 kcal | 254 kcal |
| Fat | 25 g | 22 g |
| Saturated fat | 9.4 g | 7.6 g |
| Sugars | 0.5 g | 0 g |
| Salt | 1.5 g | 1.6 g |
| Fiber | 0 g | 0.2 g |
| Protein | 14 g | 14 g |
| Additives | 0 | 0 |
| Allergens | Eggs, Milk | Eggs |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Terrine de cerf à l'Armagnac has 10% fewer calories (254 kcal vs 283 kcal).
- Terrine de cerf à l'Armagnac has 12% less fat (22 g vs 25 g).
- Terrine de cerf à l'Armagnac has 19% less saturated fat (7.6 g vs 9.4 g).
- Terrine de cerf à l'Armagnac has no sugar, while Terrine de Cerf au Cognac has 0.5 g.
- Terrine de cerf à l'Armagnac has the better Nutri-Score.
- Only Terrine de Cerf au Cognac lists: Milk.
Ingredients
Terrine de Cerf au Cognac
Gorge de porc, viande de cerf 21%, foie de volaille, lait, oeufs, sel, cognac 1%, &pices, arômes naturels
Terrine de cerf à l'Armagnac
Foie de volaille, gras de porc, viande de cerf 20%, couenne de porc, eau, vin rouge, _œuf_, sel, Armagnac 1%, arôme naturel, épices, plantes aromatiques
FAQ
Which is healthier: Terrine de Cerf au Cognac or Terrine de cerf à l'Armagnac?
Overall, Terrine de cerf à l'Armagnac 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?
Terrine de cerf à l'Armagnac has fewer calories: 254 kcal versus 283 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Terrine de cerf à l'Armagnac has less sugar: 0 g versus 0.5 g per 100 g.