Head-to-Head Analysis

Soft Baked Mini Cookies Snickerdoodle vs Wavy Potato Chips

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

Package of Soft Baked Mini Cookies Snickerdoodle

Soft Baked Mini Cookies Snickerdoodle

Not Vegan
VS
Top Pick
Package of Wavy Potato Chips

Wavy Potato Chips

Not Vegan
Nutritional Facts (per 100g)
458.3 kcal
Energy
160 kcal
29.2g
Sugars
1g
25g
Fat
11g
4.2g
Protein
1g
0.7g
Salt
0.2g

The Verdict: Which is Better?

When placing Soft Baked Mini Cookies Snickerdoodle and Wavy Potato Chips 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.

Soft Baked Mini Cookies Snickerdoodle is the more energy-dense option here, packing 298 more calories per 100g than Wavy Potato Chips. 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. Soft Baked Mini Cookies Snickerdoodle contains significantly more sugar (29.1667g) compared to the milder Wavy Potato Chips (1g). If you are monitoring your insulin levels or trying to cut down on sweets, Wavy Potato Chips is undeniably the healthier pick.

Looking to build muscle? Soft Baked Mini Cookies Snickerdoodle offers a protein boost with 4.1667g per 100g, outperforming Wavy Potato Chips in this category.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is healthier: Soft Baked Mini Cookies Snickerdoodle or Wavy Potato Chips?

It depends on your goals. Soft Baked Mini Cookies Snickerdoodle has 458.3333 calories, while Wavy Potato Chips has 160 calories. Check the detailed table above for sugar and fat content.

Is Soft Baked Mini Cookies Snickerdoodle vegan?

No, Soft Baked Mini Cookies Snickerdoodle is not certified vegan.

What is the calorie difference between Soft Baked Mini Cookies Snickerdoodle and Wavy Potato Chips?

There is a difference of 298 calories per 100g between the two products.

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