Head-to-Head Analysis

Roasted Almonds Sea Salt vs San Francisco Sourdough Boule

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

Package of Roasted Almonds Sea Salt

Roasted Almonds Sea Salt

Not Vegan
VS
Top Pick
Package of San Francisco Sourdough Boule

San Francisco Sourdough Boule

Not Vegan
Nutritional Facts (per 100g)
607.1 kcal
Energy
229 kcal
3.6g
Sugars
0g
57.1g
Fat
0g
21.4g
Protein
8.8g
1.1g
Salt
1.6g

The Verdict: Which is Better?

When placing Roasted Almonds Sea Salt and San Francisco Sourdough Boule 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.

Roasted Almonds Sea Salt is the more energy-dense option here, packing 378 more calories per 100g than San Francisco Sourdough Boule. 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. Roasted Almonds Sea Salt contains significantly more sugar (3.5714285714286g) compared to the milder San Francisco Sourdough Boule (0g). If you are monitoring your insulin levels or trying to cut down on sweets, San Francisco Sourdough Boule is undeniably the healthier pick.

Looking to build muscle? Roasted Almonds Sea Salt offers a protein boost with 21.428571428571g per 100g, outperforming San Francisco Sourdough Boule in this category.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is healthier: Roasted Almonds Sea Salt or San Francisco Sourdough Boule?

It depends on your goals. Roasted Almonds Sea Salt has 607.14285714286 calories, while San Francisco Sourdough Boule has 229 calories. Check the detailed table above for sugar and fat content.

Is Roasted Almonds Sea Salt vegan?

No, Roasted Almonds Sea Salt is not certified vegan.

What is the calorie difference between Roasted Almonds Sea Salt and San Francisco Sourdough Boule?

There is a difference of 378 calories per 100g between the two products.

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