Toastie Soft Thick 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 | Toastie Soft Thick White | White Ciabattin |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | c | b |
| NOVA group | 4 | 3 |
| Calories | 244 kcal | 237 kcal |
| Fat | 2 g | 0.7 g |
| Saturated fat | 0.5 g | 0.1 g |
| Sugars | 2.9 g | 2.1 g |
| Salt | 1 g | 0.9 g |
| Fiber | 2.1 g | 3 g |
| Protein | 9.1 g | 9.7 g |
| Additives | 4 | 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 65% less fat (0.7 g vs 2 g).
- White Ciabattin has 80% less saturated fat (0.1 g vs 0.5 g).
- White Ciabattin has 28% less sugar (2.1 g vs 2.9 g).
- White Ciabattin has 30% more fiber (3 g vs 2.1 g).
- White Ciabattin has the better Nutri-Score.
- White Ciabattin is less processed (lower NOVA group).
- Only Toastie Soft Thick White lists: Soybeans.
Ingredients
Toastie Soft Thick White
wheat flour [with calcium, iron, niacin (b3) and thiamin (b1)), water, yeast, salt, vegetable oil (rapeseed, sustainable palm), soya flour, preservative: calcium propionate, emulsifiers: e481, e472e, flour treatment agent: ascorbic acid (vitamin c).
White Ciabattin
Wheat Flour (Wheat Flour, Calcium Carbonate, Iron, Niacin, Thiamin), Water, Salt, Fermented Wheat Flour.
FAQ
Which is healthier: Toastie Soft Thick 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: 237 kcal versus 244 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
White Ciabattin has less sugar: 2.1 g versus 2.9 g per 100 g.