Head-to-Head Analysis

CRUNCHY ONION SPICY TUNA ROLL vs Kettle Cooked Potato Chips Original with Sea Salt

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

Package of CRUNCHY ONION SPICY TUNA ROLL

CRUNCHY ONION SPICY TUNA ROLL

Not Vegan
VS
Top Pick
Package of Kettle Cooked Potato Chips Original with Sea Salt

Kettle Cooked Potato Chips Original with Sea Salt

Not Vegan
Nutritional Facts (per 100g)
149 kcal
Energy
464 kcal
3.3g
Sugars
0g
5.6g
Fat
21.4g
8.2g
Protein
7.1g
0.6g
Salt
1.1g

The Verdict: Which is Better?

When placing CRUNCHY ONION SPICY TUNA ROLL and Kettle Cooked Potato Chips Original with 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, CRUNCHY ONION SPICY TUNA ROLL is the clear winner. With 315 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. CRUNCHY ONION SPICY TUNA ROLL contains significantly more sugar (3.34g) compared to the milder Kettle Cooked Potato Chips Original with Sea Salt (0g). If you are monitoring your insulin levels or trying to cut down on sweets, Kettle Cooked Potato Chips Original with Sea Salt is undeniably the healthier pick.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is healthier: CRUNCHY ONION SPICY TUNA ROLL or Kettle Cooked Potato Chips Original with Sea Salt?

It depends on your goals. CRUNCHY ONION SPICY TUNA ROLL has 149 calories, while Kettle Cooked Potato Chips Original with Sea Salt has 464 calories. Check the detailed table above for sugar and fat content.

Is CRUNCHY ONION SPICY TUNA ROLL vegan?

No, CRUNCHY ONION SPICY TUNA ROLL is not certified vegan.

What is the calorie difference between CRUNCHY ONION SPICY TUNA ROLL and Kettle Cooked Potato Chips Original with Sea Salt?

There is a difference of 315 calories per 100g between the two products.

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