Head-to-Head Analysis

Monterey Jack or Colby Jack vs Garlic Chicken Alfredo Ultra Thin Crust

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

Top Pick
Package of Monterey Jack or Colby Jack

Monterey Jack or Colby Jack

Not Vegan
VS
Package of Garlic Chicken Alfredo Ultra Thin Crust

Garlic Chicken Alfredo Ultra Thin Crust

Not Vegan
Nutritional Facts (per 100g)
381 kcal
Energy
220 kcal
0g
Sugars
2.5g
0g
Fat
9.4g
19g
Protein
12.3g
1.8g
Salt
1g

The Verdict: Which is Better?

When placing Monterey Jack or Colby Jack and Garlic Chicken Alfredo Ultra Thin Crust 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.

Monterey Jack or Colby Jack is the more energy-dense option here, packing 161 more calories per 100g than Garlic Chicken Alfredo Ultra Thin Crust. If you are looking for sustained energy or fueling a workout, this higher caloric density might be an advantage.

In terms of sugar control, Monterey Jack or Colby Jack takes the lead with only 0g of sugar per 100g, whereas Garlic Chicken Alfredo Ultra Thin Crust contains 2.47g. Lower sugar content is often linked to better metabolic health.

Looking to build muscle? Monterey Jack or Colby Jack offers a protein boost with 19g per 100g, outperforming Garlic Chicken Alfredo Ultra Thin Crust in this category.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is healthier: Monterey Jack or Colby Jack or Garlic Chicken Alfredo Ultra Thin Crust?

It depends on your goals. Monterey Jack or Colby Jack has 381 calories, while Garlic Chicken Alfredo Ultra Thin Crust has 220 calories. Check the detailed table above for sugar and fat content.

Is Monterey Jack or Colby Jack vegan?

No, Monterey Jack or Colby Jack is not certified vegan.

What is the calorie difference between Monterey Jack or Colby Jack and Garlic Chicken Alfredo Ultra Thin Crust?

There is a difference of 161 calories per 100g between the two products.

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