Tripes vs Callos a la Madrileña
Overall, Tripes 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 | Tripes | Callos a la Madrileña |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | a | b |
| NOVA group | 4 | — |
| Calories | 84 kcal | 138 kcal |
| Fat | 1.9 g | 8.2 g |
| Saturated fat | 0.9 g | 3.2 g |
| Sugars | 0.1 g | 0.5 g |
| Salt | 1 g | 0.9 g |
| Protein | 16.5 g | 14.4 g |
| Additives | 1 | 0 |
| Allergens | None listed | None listed |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Tripes has 39% fewer calories (84 kcal vs 138 kcal).
- Tripes has 77% less fat (1.9 g vs 8.2 g).
- Tripes has 72% less saturated fat (0.9 g vs 3.2 g).
- Tripes has 80% less sugar (0.1 g vs 0.5 g).
- Tripes has 13% more protein (16.5 g vs 14.4 g).
- Tripes has the better Nutri-Score.
Ingredients
Tripes
Retirer l'emballage. Réchauffer 5min (1000W). d 3 bœuf (panses bonnets, feuillets, caillettes), piûds de desossés carottes, gélatine de porc, sel, vinaigre arôme, légumes (oianons, tomates, ca!0ttes), Gtucides dontsucres Protéines Sel A consommer . 2xbooge Nô de lot
Callos a la Madrileña
Not available.
FAQ
Which is healthier: Tripes or Callos a la Madrileña?
Overall, Tripes 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?
Tripes has fewer calories: 84 kcal versus 138 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Tripes has less sugar: 0.1 g versus 0.5 g per 100 g.