Head-to-Head Analysis

Hardwood Smoked Bacon vs Candy Coated Dark Chocolate Covered Almonds

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

Top Pick
Package of Hardwood Smoked Bacon

Hardwood Smoked Bacon

Not Vegan
VS
Package of Candy Coated Dark Chocolate Covered Almonds

Candy Coated Dark Chocolate Covered Almonds

Not Vegan
Nutritional Facts (per 100g)
500 kcal
Energy
466.7 kcal
3.1g
Sugars
50g
37.5g
Fat
26.7g
37.5g
Protein
6.7g
5g
Salt
0g

The Verdict: Which is Better?

When placing Hardwood Smoked Bacon and Candy Coated Dark Chocolate Covered Almonds 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.

Hardwood Smoked Bacon is the more energy-dense option here, packing 33 more calories per 100g than Candy Coated Dark Chocolate Covered Almonds. If you are looking for sustained energy or fueling a workout, this higher caloric density might be an advantage.

In terms of sugar control, Hardwood Smoked Bacon takes the lead with only 3.12g of sugar per 100g, whereas Candy Coated Dark Chocolate Covered Almonds contains 50g. Lower sugar content is often linked to better metabolic health.

Looking to build muscle? Hardwood Smoked Bacon offers a protein boost with 37.5g per 100g, outperforming Candy Coated Dark Chocolate Covered Almonds in this category.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is healthier: Hardwood Smoked Bacon or Candy Coated Dark Chocolate Covered Almonds?

It depends on your goals. Hardwood Smoked Bacon has 500 calories, while Candy Coated Dark Chocolate Covered Almonds has 466.66666666667 calories. Check the detailed table above for sugar and fat content.

Is Hardwood Smoked Bacon vegan?

No, Hardwood Smoked Bacon is not certified vegan.

What is the calorie difference between Hardwood Smoked Bacon and Candy Coated Dark Chocolate Covered Almonds?

There is a difference of 33 calories per 100g between the two products.

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