Head-to-Head Analysis

Kellogg'S Treats Squares Original 2.13Oz vs mini 70% cacao Dark Chocolate Bars

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

Package of Kellogg'S Treats Squares Original 2.13Oz

Kellogg'S Treats Squares Original 2.13Oz

Not Vegan
VS
Top Pick
Package of mini 70% cacao Dark Chocolate Bars

mini 70% cacao Dark Chocolate Bars

Not Vegan
Nutritional Facts (per 100g)
416.7 kcal
Energy
556 kcal
35g
Sugars
27.8g
10g
Fat
41.7g
3.3g
Protein
8.3g
1.2g
Salt
0g

The Verdict: Which is Better?

When placing Kellogg'S Treats Squares Original 2.13Oz and mini 70% cacao Dark Chocolate Bars 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, Kellogg'S Treats Squares Original 2.13Oz is the clear winner. With 139 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. Kellogg'S Treats Squares Original 2.13Oz contains significantly more sugar (35g) compared to the milder mini 70% cacao Dark Chocolate Bars (27.8g). If you are monitoring your insulin levels or trying to cut down on sweets, mini 70% cacao Dark Chocolate Bars is undeniably the healthier pick.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is healthier: Kellogg'S Treats Squares Original 2.13Oz or mini 70% cacao Dark Chocolate Bars?

It depends on your goals. Kellogg'S Treats Squares Original 2.13Oz has 416.66666666667 calories, while mini 70% cacao Dark Chocolate Bars has 556 calories. Check the detailed table above for sugar and fat content.

Is Kellogg'S Treats Squares Original 2.13Oz vegan?

No, Kellogg'S Treats Squares Original 2.13Oz is not certified vegan.

What is the calorie difference between Kellogg'S Treats Squares Original 2.13Oz and mini 70% cacao Dark Chocolate Bars?

There is a difference of 139 calories per 100g between the two products.

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