Head-to-Head Analysis

Oat Bar Coconut vs emily's dark chocolate covered blueberries

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

Package of Oat Bar Coconut

Oat Bar Coconut

Not Vegan
VS
Top Pick
Package of emily's dark chocolate covered blueberries

emily's dark chocolate covered blueberries

Not Vegan
Nutritional Facts (per 100g)
419 kcal
Energy
170 kcal
23.3g
Sugars
22g
16.3g
Fat
8g
7g
Protein
1g
0.3g
Salt
0g

The Verdict: Which is Better?

When placing Oat Bar Coconut and emily's dark chocolate covered blueberries 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.

Oat Bar Coconut is the more energy-dense option here, packing 249 more calories per 100g than emily's dark chocolate covered blueberries. 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. Oat Bar Coconut contains significantly more sugar (23.3g) compared to the milder emily's dark chocolate covered blueberries (22g). If you are monitoring your insulin levels or trying to cut down on sweets, emily's dark chocolate covered blueberries is undeniably the healthier pick.

Looking to build muscle? Oat Bar Coconut offers a protein boost with 6.98g per 100g, outperforming emily's dark chocolate covered blueberries in this category.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is healthier: Oat Bar Coconut or emily's dark chocolate covered blueberries?

It depends on your goals. Oat Bar Coconut has 419 calories, while emily's dark chocolate covered blueberries has 170 calories. Check the detailed table above for sugar and fat content.

Is Oat Bar Coconut vegan?

No, Oat Bar Coconut is not certified vegan.

What is the calorie difference between Oat Bar Coconut and emily's dark chocolate covered blueberries?

There is a difference of 249 calories per 100g between the two products.

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