Head-to-Head Analysis

Tru Fru Apple And Banana vs California style pie sliced olives

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

Package of Tru Fru Apple And Banana

Tru Fru Apple And Banana

Not Vegan
VS
Top Pick
Package of California style pie sliced olives

California style pie sliced olives

Not Vegan
Nutritional Facts (per 100g)
318 kcal
Energy
156 kcal
59.1g
Sugars
0g
0g
Fat
15.6g
4.6g
Protein
0g
0.1g
Salt
2g

The Verdict: Which is Better?

When placing Tru Fru Apple And Banana and California style pie sliced olives 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.

Tru Fru Apple And Banana is the more energy-dense option here, packing 162 more calories per 100g than California style pie sliced olives. 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. Tru Fru Apple And Banana contains significantly more sugar (59.1g) compared to the milder California style pie sliced olives (0g). If you are monitoring your insulin levels or trying to cut down on sweets, California style pie sliced olives is undeniably the healthier pick.

Looking to build muscle? Tru Fru Apple And Banana offers a protein boost with 4.55g per 100g, outperforming California style pie sliced olives in this category.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is healthier: Tru Fru Apple And Banana or California style pie sliced olives?

It depends on your goals. Tru Fru Apple And Banana has 318 calories, while California style pie sliced olives has 156 calories. Check the detailed table above for sugar and fat content.

Is Tru Fru Apple And Banana vegan?

No, Tru Fru Apple And Banana is not certified vegan.

What is the calorie difference between Tru Fru Apple And Banana and California style pie sliced olives?

There is a difference of 162 calories per 100g between the two products.

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