SLOW COOKED HAM vs CAPOCOLLO LOCALLY PORK
Nutrition comparison per 100 g serving
Ad 468x60
CAPOCOLLO LOCALLY PORK wins in 4 out of 9 nutrient categories
SLOW COOKED HAM: 3
vs
CAPOCOLLO LOCALLY PORK: 4
(2 ties)
Overview
| Nutrient | SLOW COOKED HAM | CAPOCOLLO LOCALLY PORK | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Calories | 107 cal | 286 cal | |
| Protein | 19.6 g | 25 g | |
| Carbs | 1.8 g | 0 g | |
| Fat | 1.8 g | 21.4 g | |
| Fiber | 0 g | 0 g | Tie |
| Sugar | 0 g | 0 g | Tie |
Vitamins
| Vitamin | SLOW COOKED HAM | CAPOCOLLO LOCALLY PORK | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vitamin C, total ascorbic acid | 26.8 MG | 0 MG |
Minerals
| Mineral | SLOW COOKED HAM | CAPOCOLLO LOCALLY PORK | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Iron, Fe | 0.6 MG | 1.3 MG | |
| Sodium, Na | 1,125 MG | 1,821 MG |