Head-to-Head Analysis

Pure Cane Granulated Sugar vs Low Moisture Part Skim Mozzarell Twists String Cheese

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

Package of Pure Cane Granulated Sugar

Pure Cane Granulated Sugar

Not Vegan
VS
Top Pick
Package of Low Moisture Part Skim Mozzarell Twists String Cheese

Low Moisture Part Skim Mozzarell Twists String Cheese

Not Vegan
Nutritional Facts (per 100g)
400 kcal
Energy
1270 kcal
100g
Sugars
17.4g
0g
Fat
86.8g
0g
Protein
104g
0g
Salt
0g

The Verdict: Which is Better?

When placing Pure Cane Granulated Sugar and Low Moisture Part Skim Mozzarell Twists String Cheese 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, Pure Cane Granulated Sugar is the clear winner. With 870 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. Pure Cane Granulated Sugar contains significantly more sugar (100g) compared to the milder Low Moisture Part Skim Mozzarell Twists String Cheese (17.4g). If you are monitoring your insulin levels or trying to cut down on sweets, Low Moisture Part Skim Mozzarell Twists String Cheese is undeniably the healthier pick.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is healthier: Pure Cane Granulated Sugar or Low Moisture Part Skim Mozzarell Twists String Cheese?

It depends on your goals. Pure Cane Granulated Sugar has 400 calories, while Low Moisture Part Skim Mozzarell Twists String Cheese has 1270 calories. Check the detailed table above for sugar and fat content.

Is Pure Cane Granulated Sugar vegan?

No, Pure Cane Granulated Sugar is not certified vegan.

What is the calorie difference between Pure Cane Granulated Sugar and Low Moisture Part Skim Mozzarell Twists String Cheese?

There is a difference of 870 calories per 100g between the two products.

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