Head-to-Head Analysis

USDA STYLE BEEF CHUCK COUNTRY STYLE RIB BONELESS vs Black pitted large california ripe olives

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

Package of USDA STYLE BEEF CHUCK COUNTRY STYLE RIB BONELESS

USDA STYLE BEEF CHUCK COUNTRY STYLE RIB BONELESS

Not Vegan
VS
Top Pick
Package of Black pitted large california ripe olives

Black pitted large california ripe olives

Not Vegan
Nutritional Facts (per 100g)
212 kcal
Energy
100 kcal
0g
Sugars
0g
15g
Fat
10g
18.5g
Protein
0g
0g
Salt
2g

The Verdict: Which is Better?

When placing USDA STYLE BEEF CHUCK COUNTRY STYLE RIB BONELESS and Black pitted large california ripe 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.

USDA STYLE BEEF CHUCK COUNTRY STYLE RIB BONELESS is the more energy-dense option here, packing 112 more calories per 100g than Black pitted large california ripe olives. If you are looking for sustained energy or fueling a workout, this higher caloric density might be an advantage.

Looking to build muscle? USDA STYLE BEEF CHUCK COUNTRY STYLE RIB BONELESS offers a protein boost with 18.5g per 100g, outperforming Black pitted large california ripe olives in this category.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is healthier: USDA STYLE BEEF CHUCK COUNTRY STYLE RIB BONELESS or Black pitted large california ripe olives?

It depends on your goals. USDA STYLE BEEF CHUCK COUNTRY STYLE RIB BONELESS has 212 calories, while Black pitted large california ripe olives has 100 calories. Check the detailed table above for sugar and fat content.

Is USDA STYLE BEEF CHUCK COUNTRY STYLE RIB BONELESS vegan?

No, USDA STYLE BEEF CHUCK COUNTRY STYLE RIB BONELESS is not certified vegan.

What is the calorie difference between USDA STYLE BEEF CHUCK COUNTRY STYLE RIB BONELESS and Black pitted large california ripe olives?

There is a difference of 112 calories per 100g between the two products.

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