Head-to-Head Analysis

Reduced Fat Ultra-filtered Milk vs Low-Moisture Part-Skim Mozzarella Cheese Shreds

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

Package of Reduced Fat Ultra-filtered Milk

Reduced Fat Ultra-filtered Milk

Not Vegan
VS
Top Pick
Package of Low-Moisture Part-Skim Mozzarella Cheese Shreds

Low-Moisture Part-Skim Mozzarella Cheese Shreds

Not Vegan
Nutritional Facts (per 100g)
50.7 kcal
Energy
285.7 kcal
2.4g
Sugars
0g
1.9g
Fat
17.9g
5.6g
Protein
28.6g
0.1g
Salt
1.5g

The Verdict: Which is Better?

When placing Reduced Fat Ultra-filtered Milk and Low-Moisture Part-Skim Mozzarella Cheese Shreds 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, Reduced Fat Ultra-filtered Milk is the clear winner. With 235 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. Reduced Fat Ultra-filtered Milk contains significantly more sugar (2.42g) compared to the milder Low-Moisture Part-Skim Mozzarella Cheese Shreds (0g). If you are monitoring your insulin levels or trying to cut down on sweets, Low-Moisture Part-Skim Mozzarella Cheese Shreds is undeniably the healthier pick.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is healthier: Reduced Fat Ultra-filtered Milk or Low-Moisture Part-Skim Mozzarella Cheese Shreds?

It depends on your goals. Reduced Fat Ultra-filtered Milk has 50.7 calories, while Low-Moisture Part-Skim Mozzarella Cheese Shreds has 285.71428571429 calories. Check the detailed table above for sugar and fat content.

Is Reduced Fat Ultra-filtered Milk vegan?

No, Reduced Fat Ultra-filtered Milk is not certified vegan.

What is the calorie difference between Reduced Fat Ultra-filtered Milk and Low-Moisture Part-Skim Mozzarella Cheese Shreds?

There is a difference of 235 calories per 100g between the two products.

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