Head-to-Head Analysis

sweet chili sauce vs Himalasalt primordial himalayan sea salt fine grain shaker

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

Package of sweet chili sauce

sweet chili sauce

Not Vegan
VS
Top Pick
Package of Himalasalt primordial himalayan sea salt fine grain shaker

Himalasalt primordial himalayan sea salt fine grain shaker

Not Vegan
Nutritional Facts (per 100g)
133 kcal
Energy
0 kcal
33.3g
Sugars
0g
0g
Fat
0g
0g
Protein
0g
2.1g
Salt
0g

The Verdict: Which is Better?

When placing sweet chili sauce and Himalasalt primordial himalayan sea salt fine grain shaker 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.

sweet chili sauce is the more energy-dense option here, packing 133 more calories per 100g than Himalasalt primordial himalayan sea salt fine grain shaker. 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. sweet chili sauce contains significantly more sugar (33.3g) compared to the milder Himalasalt primordial himalayan sea salt fine grain shaker (0g). If you are monitoring your insulin levels or trying to cut down on sweets, Himalasalt primordial himalayan sea salt fine grain shaker is undeniably the healthier pick.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is healthier: sweet chili sauce or Himalasalt primordial himalayan sea salt fine grain shaker?

It depends on your goals. sweet chili sauce has 133 calories, while Himalasalt primordial himalayan sea salt fine grain shaker has 0 calories. Check the detailed table above for sugar and fat content.

Is sweet chili sauce vegan?

No, sweet chili sauce is not certified vegan.

What is the calorie difference between sweet chili sauce and Himalasalt primordial himalayan sea salt fine grain shaker?

There is a difference of 133 calories per 100g between the two products.

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