Head-to-Head Analysis

Strength Meals Co - Smokey Mexican Beef Bowl vs Sea Salt Kettle Potato Chips

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

Top Pick
Package of Strength Meals Co - Smokey Mexican Beef Bowl

Strength Meals Co - Smokey Mexican Beef Bowl

Not Vegan
VS
Package of Sea Salt Kettle Potato Chips

Sea Salt Kettle Potato Chips

Not Vegan
Nutritional Facts (per 100g)
102 kcal
Energy
500 kcal
2.3g
Sugars
7.1g
1.8g
Fat
28.6g
8.9g
Protein
3.6g
617.5g
Salt
1.4g

The Verdict: Which is Better?

When placing Strength Meals Co - Smokey Mexican Beef Bowl and Sea Salt Kettle 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.

For calorie-conscious consumers, Strength Meals Co - Smokey Mexican Beef Bowl is the clear winner. With 398 fewer calories per 100g than its competitor, it allows for more volume while keeping your energy intake in check.

In terms of sugar control, Strength Meals Co - Smokey Mexican Beef Bowl takes the lead with only 2.3g of sugar per 100g, whereas Sea Salt Kettle Potato Chips contains 7.14g. Lower sugar content is often linked to better metabolic health.

Looking to build muscle? Strength Meals Co - Smokey Mexican Beef Bowl offers a protein boost with 8.9g per 100g, outperforming Sea Salt Kettle Potato Chips in this category.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is healthier: Strength Meals Co - Smokey Mexican Beef Bowl or Sea Salt Kettle Potato Chips?

Strength Meals Co - Smokey Mexican Beef Bowl appears to be the healthier option generally, as it has less sugar and fewer calories.

Is Strength Meals Co - Smokey Mexican Beef Bowl vegan?

No, Strength Meals Co - Smokey Mexican Beef Bowl is not certified vegan.

What is the calorie difference between Strength Meals Co - Smokey Mexican Beef Bowl and Sea Salt Kettle Potato Chips?

There is a difference of 398 calories per 100g between the two products.

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