Tomates allongées en grappe vs Tortilla chips sweet chili
Overall, Tomates allongées en grappe has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 7 of our comparison points versus 1.
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Tomates allongées en grappe | Tortilla chips sweet chili |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | a | d |
| NOVA group | — | 4 |
| Calories | 14 kcal | 472 kcal |
| Fat | 0.5 g | 20 g |
| Saturated fat | 0.1 g | 2 g |
| Sugars | 1.9 g | 3 g |
| Salt | 0 g | 1.2 g |
| Protein | 0.9 g | 6.6 g |
| Additives | 0 | 2 |
| Allergens | None listed | None listed |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Tomates allongées en grappe has 97% fewer calories (14 kcal vs 472 kcal).
- Tomates allongées en grappe has 98% less fat (0.5 g vs 20 g).
- Tomates allongées en grappe has 95% less saturated fat (0.1 g vs 2 g).
- Tomates allongées en grappe has 37% less sugar (1.9 g vs 3 g).
- Tomates allongées en grappe has no salt, while Tortilla chips sweet chili has 1.2 g.
- Tortilla chips sweet chili has 86% more protein (6.6 g vs 0.9 g).
- Tomates allongées en grappe has the better Nutri-Score.
Ingredients
Tomates allongées en grappe
Not available.
Tortilla chips sweet chili
Corn flour 74%, sunflower oil, fructose salt, natural flavors, maltodextrin, sugar, acidity correctors (mallic acid, ettric acid, sodium acetates), onion, tomato, garlic, beet, red beet, color (paprika extract), spice extract May contain: soy.
FAQ
Which is healthier: Tomates allongées en grappe or Tortilla chips sweet chili?
Overall, Tomates allongées en grappe 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?
Tomates allongées en grappe has fewer calories: 14 kcal versus 472 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Tomates allongées en grappe has less sugar: 1.9 g versus 3 g per 100 g.