Head-to-Head Analysis

Grilled Chicken Caesar vs Small Pitted California Ripe Olives

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

Package of Grilled Chicken Caesar

Grilled Chicken Caesar

Not Vegan
VS
Top Pick
Package of Small Pitted California Ripe Olives

Small Pitted California Ripe Olives

Not Vegan
Nutritional Facts (per 100g)
130 kcal
Energy
100 kcal
1.1g
Sugars
0g
9g
Fat
10g
9.6g
Protein
0g
1.2g
Salt
2g

The Verdict: Which is Better?

When placing Grilled Chicken Caesar and Small Pitted California Ripe Olives 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.

Grilled Chicken Caesar is the more energy-dense option here, packing 30 more calories per 100g than Small Pitted California Ripe Olives. 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. Grilled Chicken Caesar contains significantly more sugar (1.13g) compared to the milder Small Pitted California Ripe Olives (0g). If you are monitoring your insulin levels or trying to cut down on sweets, Small Pitted California Ripe Olives is undeniably the healthier pick.

Looking to build muscle? Grilled Chicken Caesar offers a protein boost with 9.6g per 100g, outperforming Small Pitted California Ripe Olives in this category.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is healthier: Grilled Chicken Caesar or Small Pitted California Ripe Olives?

It depends on your goals. Grilled Chicken Caesar has 130 calories, while Small Pitted California Ripe Olives has 100 calories. Check the detailed table above for sugar and fat content.

Is Grilled Chicken Caesar vegan?

No, Grilled Chicken Caesar is not certified vegan.

What is the calorie difference between Grilled Chicken Caesar and Small Pitted California Ripe Olives?

There is a difference of 30 calories per 100g between the two products.

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