Comparison

Zimt vs Biscuits Etoile Cannelle

Neither product is clearly better overall — it depends on what matters most to you.

Nutrition per 100 g

NutrientZimtBiscuits Etoile Cannelle
Nutri-Score — —
NOVA group — 4
Calories 64 kcal 429 kcal
Fat 3.5 g 16 g
Saturated fat 2.3 g 1.3 g
Sugars 4.8 g 52 g
Salt 0.1 g 0.2 g
Fiber 0 g 5.5 g
Protein 3.3 g 7.6 g
Additives03
AllergensNone listedEggs, Gluten, Nuts

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

Key differences

  • Zimt has 85% fewer calories (64 kcal vs 429 kcal).
  • Zimt has 78% less fat (3.5 g vs 16 g).
  • Biscuits Etoile Cannelle has 43% less saturated fat (1.3 g vs 2.3 g).
  • Zimt has 91% less sugar (4.8 g vs 52 g).
  • Biscuits Etoile Cannelle has 100% more fiber (5.5 g vs 0 g).
  • Biscuits Etoile Cannelle has 57% more protein (7.6 g vs 3.3 g).
  • Only Biscuits Etoile Cannelle lists: Eggs, Gluten, Nuts.

Ingredients

Zimt

Kann Spuren von Weizen, Soja, Milch, Senf, Sellerie, Sesam und Nüssen ent - halten.

Biscuits Etoile Cannelle

Mélange de NOISETTE et AMANDE en poudre 25%, sucre, mélange d'écorce de fruits confits (zeste de citron, sucre, sirop de glucose-fructose, écorce d'orange, acidifiant: acide citrique), fructose en poudre, farine de BLE (GLUTEN), pâte d'AMANDES (AMANDE, sucre, sirop de sucre inverti), cannelle 1,2%, blanc d'OEUF en poudre, amidon de BLÉ (GLUTEN) poudre à lever: carbonates d'ammonium, acidifiant: acide citrique, gélifiant : agar-agar. Peut contenir des traces de soja, arachide, lait, lupin, autres fruits à coque, sésame.

FAQ

Which is healthier: Zimt or Biscuits Etoile Cannelle?

Neither product is clearly better overall — it depends on what matters most to you. 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?

Zimt has fewer calories: 64 kcal versus 429 kcal per 100 g.

Which has less sugar?

Zimt has less sugar: 4.8 g versus 52 g per 100 g.

More comparisons