Vinaigre balsamique de Modène 500ml vs Crema Aceto Balsamico di Modena
Overall, Vinaigre balsamique de Modène 500ml has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 3 of our comparison points versus 1.
Vinaigre balsamique de Modène 500ml
Crema Aceto Balsamico di Modena
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Vinaigre balsamique de Modèn... | Crema Aceto Balsamico di Mod... |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | — | — |
| NOVA group | 2 | 4 |
| Calories | 102 kcal | 195 kcal |
| Fat | 0 g | 0 g |
| Saturated fat | 0 g | 0 g |
| Sugars | 19 g | 41 g |
| Salt | 0.1 g | 0.1 g |
| Fiber | 0 g | 1.1 g |
| Protein | 1.1 g | 0.9 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
- Vinaigre balsamique de Modène 500ml has 48% fewer calories (102 kcal vs 195 kcal).
- Vinaigre balsamique de Modène 500ml has 54% less sugar (19 g vs 41 g).
- Crema Aceto Balsamico di Modena has 100% more fiber (1.1 g vs 0 g).
- Vinaigre balsamique de Modène 500ml is less processed (lower NOVA group).
Ingredients
Vinaigre balsamique de Modène 500ml
Vinaigre de vin, moût de raisin concentré et cuit
Crema Aceto Balsamico di Modena
gekochter Traubenmost, Aceto Balsamico Modena IGP 38% (Weinessig, konzentrierter Traubenmost, gekochter Traubenmost, Farbstoff: E 150d), Feinessig Farbstoff: E 150d, modifizierte Maisstärke, Verdickungsmittel: Xanthan.
FAQ
Which is healthier: Vinaigre balsamique de Modène 500ml or Crema Aceto Balsamico di Modena?
Overall, Vinaigre balsamique de Modène 500ml 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?
Vinaigre balsamique de Modène 500ml has fewer calories: 102 kcal versus 195 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Vinaigre balsamique de Modène 500ml has less sugar: 19 g versus 41 g per 100 g.