Head-to-Head Analysis

Chocolate reduced fat milk vs Kombucha raspberry lemon ginger

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

Package of Chocolate reduced fat milk

Chocolate reduced fat milk

Not Vegan
VS
Top Pick
Package of Kombucha raspberry lemon ginger

Kombucha raspberry lemon ginger

Not Vegan
Nutritional Facts (per 100g)
95.8 kcal
Energy
18 kcal
14.2g
Sugars
4.5g
2.1g
Fat
0g
4.2g
Protein
0g
0.2g
Salt
0g

The Verdict: Which is Better?

When placing Chocolate reduced fat milk and Kombucha raspberry lemon ginger 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.

Chocolate reduced fat milk is the more energy-dense option here, packing 78 more calories per 100g than Kombucha raspberry lemon ginger. If you are looking for sustained energy or fueling a workout, this higher caloric density might be an advantage.

However, watch out for the sugar content. Chocolate reduced fat milk contains significantly more sugar (14.2g) compared to the milder Kombucha raspberry lemon ginger (4.45g). If you are monitoring your insulin levels or trying to cut down on sweets, Kombucha raspberry lemon ginger is undeniably the healthier pick.

Looking to build muscle? Chocolate reduced fat milk offers a protein boost with 4.17g per 100g, outperforming Kombucha raspberry lemon ginger in this category.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is healthier: Chocolate reduced fat milk or Kombucha raspberry lemon ginger?

It depends on your goals. Chocolate reduced fat milk has 95.8 calories, while Kombucha raspberry lemon ginger has 18 calories. Check the detailed table above for sugar and fat content.

Is Chocolate reduced fat milk vegan?

No, Chocolate reduced fat milk is not certified vegan.

What is the calorie difference between Chocolate reduced fat milk and Kombucha raspberry lemon ginger?

There is a difference of 78 calories per 100g between the two products.

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