Comparison

Wiśnia nowosądecka w czekoladzie vs Ciliegie amarane ricoperte di cioccolato fondente

Overall, Wiśnia nowosądecka w czekoladzie has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 2 of our comparison points versus 1.

Nutrition per 100 g

NutrientWiśnia nowosądecka w czekola...Ciliegie amarane ricoperte d...
Nutri-Score e e
NOVA group 4 —
Calories 429 kcal 435 kcal
Fat 17 g 15.7 g
Saturated fat 11 g 9.9 g
Sugars 62 g 71.7 g
Salt 0 g 0.1 g
Fiber 0.8 g 1.2 g
Protein 3.6 g 1.8 g
Additives40
AllergensSoybeansNone listed

Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).

Key differences

  • Wiśnia nowosądecka w czekoladzie has 14% less sugar (62 g vs 71.7 g).
  • Ciliegie amarane ricoperte di cioccolato fondente has 33% more fiber (1.2 g vs 0.8 g).
  • Wiśnia nowosądecka w czekoladzie has 50% more protein (3.6 g vs 1.8 g).
  • Only Wiśnia nowosądecka w czekoladzie lists: Soybeans.

Ingredients

Wiśnia nowosądecka w czekoladzie

Czekolada (59,5%) [cukier, miazga kakaowa, tłuszcz kakaowy, emulgator (lecytyny (z _soi_)), polirycynooleinian poliglicerolu, aromat], wiśnia kandyzowana (40%) [cukier, wiśnia, mąka ryżowa, regulator kwasowości (kwas cytrynowy), naturalny aromat wiśniowy z innymi naturalnymi aromatami), cukier, syrop glukozowy, substancja glazurująca (guma arabska).

Ciliegie amarane ricoperte di cioccolato fondente

Not available.

FAQ

Which is healthier: Wiśnia nowosądecka w czekoladzie or Ciliegie amarane ricoperte di cioccolato fondente?

Overall, Wiśnia nowosądecka w czekoladzie 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?

Wiśnia nowosądecka w czekoladzie has fewer calories: 429 kcal versus 435 kcal per 100 g.

Which has less sugar?

Wiśnia nowosądecka w czekoladzie has less sugar: 62 g versus 71.7 g per 100 g.

More comparisons