Head-to-Head Analysis

brad’s organic kettle cooked plantain chips vs Heirloom Corn Dippers, Sea Salt

Wondering which one to pick? We analyzed the nutritional profile, ingredients, and vegan status to help you decide.

Package of brad’s organic kettle cooked plantain chips

brad’s organic kettle cooked plantain chips

Not Vegan
VS
Top Pick
Package of Heirloom Corn Dippers, Sea Salt

Heirloom Corn Dippers, Sea Salt

Not Vegan
Nutritional Facts (per 100g)
170 kcal
Energy
535.7 kcal
2g
Sugars
0g
9g
Fat
32.1g
1g
Protein
7.1g
162.5g
Salt
0.7g

The Verdict: Which is Better?

When placing brad’s organic kettle cooked plantain chips and Heirloom Corn Dippers, Sea Salt side-by-side, the nutritional differences become quite clear. Both products cater to specific dietary needs, but picking the right one depends on whether you are prioritizing weight loss, muscle gain, or clean eating.

For calorie-conscious consumers, brad’s organic kettle cooked plantain chips is the clear winner. With 366 fewer calories per 100g than its competitor, it allows for more volume while keeping your energy intake in check.

However, watch out for the sugar content. brad’s organic kettle cooked plantain chips contains significantly more sugar (2g) compared to the milder Heirloom Corn Dippers, Sea Salt (0g). If you are monitoring your insulin levels or trying to cut down on sweets, Heirloom Corn Dippers, Sea Salt is undeniably the healthier pick.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is healthier: brad’s organic kettle cooked plantain chips or Heirloom Corn Dippers, Sea Salt?

It depends on your goals. brad’s organic kettle cooked plantain chips has 170 calories, while Heirloom Corn Dippers, Sea Salt has 535.71428571429 calories. Check the detailed table above for sugar and fat content.

Is brad’s organic kettle cooked plantain chips vegan?

No, brad’s organic kettle cooked plantain chips is not certified vegan.

What is the calorie difference between brad’s organic kettle cooked plantain chips and Heirloom Corn Dippers, Sea Salt?

There is a difference of 366 calories per 100g between the two products.

Data source: Open Food Facts. Comparisons are generated automatically based on nutritional values per 100g.