Comparison
Wilde zalmfilets vs Vissticks
Overall, Wilde zalmfilets has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 8 of our comparison points versus 1.
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Wilde zalmfilets | Vissticks |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | a | b |
| NOVA group | 1 | 3 |
| Calories | 99 kcal | 190 kcal |
| Fat | 2.5 g | 9 g |
| Saturated fat | 0.5 g | 0.8 g |
| Sugars | 0 g | 0.8 g |
| Salt | 0.6 g | 0.8 g |
| Fiber | 0 g | 0.8 g |
| Protein | 19 g | 13 g |
| Additives | 0 | 0 |
| Allergens | Fish | Fish, Gluten |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Wilde zalmfilets has 48% fewer calories (99 kcal vs 190 kcal).
- Wilde zalmfilets has 72% less fat (2.5 g vs 9 g).
- Wilde zalmfilets has 38% less saturated fat (0.5 g vs 0.8 g).
- Wilde zalmfilets has no sugar, while Vissticks has 0.8 g.
- Vissticks has 100% more fiber (0.8 g vs 0 g).
- Wilde zalmfilets has 32% more protein (19 g vs 13 g).
- Wilde zalmfilets has the better Nutri-Score.
- Wilde zalmfilets is less processed (lower NOVA group).
- Only Vissticks lists: Gluten.
Ingredients
Wilde zalmfilets
Pacifische zalm
Vissticks
65% koolvis, tarwebloem, raapolie, water, aardappelzetmeel, zout, gist, specerijen,
FAQ
Which is healthier: Wilde zalmfilets or Vissticks?
Overall, Wilde zalmfilets 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?
Wilde zalmfilets has fewer calories: 99 kcal versus 190 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Wilde zalmfilets has less sugar: 0 g versus 0.8 g per 100 g.