Cals › Party food › Compare › Bibigo Mandu Chicken Dumplings 280g vs Hong Kong Dim Sim Kitchen Pork Dim Sims 480g
Bibigo Mandu Chicken Dumplings 280g vs Hong Kong Dim Sim Kitchen Pork Dim Sims 480g
Per 100 g, Bibigo Mandu Chicken Dumplings 280g has less sugar (2 vs 4.1), less sodium (315 vs 360), less saturated fat (0.4 vs 2) than Hong Kong Dim Sim Kitchen Pork Dim Sims 480g.
Same aisle, measurably different composition. Every number is verified against independent supplier feeds and the labels photographed on pack.
Bibigo Mandu Chicken Dumplings 280gBibigo
vs
Hong Kong Dim Sim Kitchen Pork Dim Sims 480gHong Kong Dim Sim Kitchen
Bibigo Mandu Chicken Dumplings 280g leads on
Protein (higher)
8.9 vs 8 g
Fat, total (lower)
2.4 vs 5.5 g
saturated (lower)
0.4 vs 2 g
sugars (lower)
2 vs 4.1 g
Sodium (lower)
315 vs 360 mg
Energy (lower)
557 vs 571 kJ
Carbohydrate (lower)
12.2 vs 18.6 g
Side by side, per 100 g
| Value | Bibigo | Hong Kong Dim Sim Kitchen |
|---|---|---|
| Energy | 571 kJ (136 Cal) | 557 kJ (133 Cal) |
| Protein | 8.9 g | 8 g |
| Fat, total | 2.4 g | 5.5 g |
| - saturated | 0.4 g | 2 g |
| Carbohydrate | 18.6 g | 12.2 g |
| - sugars | 2 g | 4.1 g |
| Dietary fibre | 1.8 g | - |
| Sodium | 315 mg | 360 mg |
✓ marks a difference beyond label-rounding tolerance.
What’s in each box
Bibigo: see pack
Hong Kong Dim Sim Kitchen: see pack