Head-to-Head Analysis

Fully Cooked Boneless Ham vs Italian Style Sub Salad Kit with Ham

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

Package of Fully Cooked Boneless Ham

Fully Cooked Boneless Ham

Not Vegan
VS
Top Pick
Package of Italian Style Sub Salad Kit with Ham

Italian Style Sub Salad Kit with Ham

Not Vegan
Nutritional Facts (per 100g)
107 kcal
Energy
130 kcal
3.6g
Sugars
1.1g
2.4g
Fat
9g
16.7g
Protein
9.6g
2.3g
Salt
1g

The Verdict: Which is Better?

When placing Fully Cooked Boneless Ham and Italian Style Sub Salad Kit with Ham 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, Fully Cooked Boneless Ham is the clear winner. With 23 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. Fully Cooked Boneless Ham contains significantly more sugar (3.57g) compared to the milder Italian Style Sub Salad Kit with Ham (1.13g). If you are monitoring your insulin levels or trying to cut down on sweets, Italian Style Sub Salad Kit with Ham is undeniably the healthier pick.

Looking to build muscle? Fully Cooked Boneless Ham offers a protein boost with 16.7g per 100g, outperforming Italian Style Sub Salad Kit with Ham in this category.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is healthier: Fully Cooked Boneless Ham or Italian Style Sub Salad Kit with Ham?

It depends on your goals. Fully Cooked Boneless Ham has 107 calories, while Italian Style Sub Salad Kit with Ham has 130 calories. Check the detailed table above for sugar and fat content.

Is Fully Cooked Boneless Ham vegan?

No, Fully Cooked Boneless Ham is not certified vegan.

What is the calorie difference between Fully Cooked Boneless Ham and Italian Style Sub Salad Kit with Ham?

There is a difference of 23 calories per 100g between the two products.

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