LITE CAESAR DRESSING vs TRADITIONAL FERMENTED TEA LEAF DRESSING
Nutrition comparison per 100 g serving
Ad 468x60
TRADITIONAL FERMENTED TEA LEAF DRESSING wins in 5 out of 11 nutrient categories
LITE CAESAR DRESSING: 3
vs
TRADITIONAL FERMENTED TEA LEAF DRESSING: 5
(3 ties)
Overview
| Nutrient | LITE CAESAR DRESSING | TRADITIONAL FERMENTED TEA LEAF DRESSING | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Calories | 300 cal | 567 cal | |
| Protein | 0 g | 3.3 g | |
| Carbs | 0 g | 6.7 g | |
| Fat | 30 g | 60 g | |
| Fiber | 0 g | 0 g | Tie |
| Sugar | 0 g | 0 g | Tie |
Vitamins
| Vitamin | LITE CAESAR DRESSING | TRADITIONAL FERMENTED TEA LEAF DRESSING | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vitamin C, total ascorbic acid | 0 MG | 0 MG | Tie |
Minerals
| Mineral | LITE CAESAR DRESSING | TRADITIONAL FERMENTED TEA LEAF DRESSING | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Calcium, Ca | 0 MG | 100 MG | |
| Iron, Fe | 0 MG | 7.3 MG | |
| Potassium, K | 0 MG | 867 MG | |
| Sodium, Na | 600 MG | 700 MG |