Head-to-Head Analysis

Sea Salt Almond Dark Chocolate vs Soft Australian Licorice

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

Package of Sea Salt Almond Dark Chocolate

Sea Salt Almond Dark Chocolate

Not Vegan
VS
Top Pick
Package of Soft Australian Licorice

Soft Australian Licorice

Not Vegan
Nutritional Facts (per 100g)
520 kcal
Energy
333.3 kcal
40g
Sugars
36.7g
32g
Fat
3.3g
8g
Protein
3.3g
0.4g
Salt
0.3g

The Verdict: Which is Better?

When placing Sea Salt Almond Dark Chocolate and Soft Australian Licorice 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.

Sea Salt Almond Dark Chocolate is the more energy-dense option here, packing 187 more calories per 100g than Soft Australian Licorice. 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. Sea Salt Almond Dark Chocolate contains significantly more sugar (40g) compared to the milder Soft Australian Licorice (36.666666666667g). If you are monitoring your insulin levels or trying to cut down on sweets, Soft Australian Licorice is undeniably the healthier pick.

Looking to build muscle? Sea Salt Almond Dark Chocolate offers a protein boost with 8g per 100g, outperforming Soft Australian Licorice in this category.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is healthier: Sea Salt Almond Dark Chocolate or Soft Australian Licorice?

It depends on your goals. Sea Salt Almond Dark Chocolate has 520 calories, while Soft Australian Licorice has 333.33333333333 calories. Check the detailed table above for sugar and fat content.

Is Sea Salt Almond Dark Chocolate vegan?

No, Sea Salt Almond Dark Chocolate is not certified vegan.

What is the calorie difference between Sea Salt Almond Dark Chocolate and Soft Australian Licorice?

There is a difference of 187 calories per 100g between the two products.

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