Head-to-Head Analysis

Cranberries and toasted almonds vs Double Chocolate Muffins

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

Package of Cranberries and toasted almonds

Cranberries and toasted almonds

Not Vegan
VS
Top Pick
Package of Double Chocolate Muffins

Double Chocolate Muffins

Not Vegan
Nutritional Facts (per 100g)
429 kcal
Energy
175 kcal
42.9g
Sugars
17.5g
21.4g
Fat
5.3g
14.3g
Protein
7g
0g
Salt
0.7g

The Verdict: Which is Better?

When placing Cranberries and toasted almonds and Double Chocolate Muffins 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.

Cranberries and toasted almonds is the more energy-dense option here, packing 254 more calories per 100g than Double Chocolate Muffins. 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. Cranberries and toasted almonds contains significantly more sugar (42.9g) compared to the milder Double Chocolate Muffins (17.5g). If you are monitoring your insulin levels or trying to cut down on sweets, Double Chocolate Muffins is undeniably the healthier pick.

Looking to build muscle? Cranberries and toasted almonds offers a protein boost with 14.3g per 100g, outperforming Double Chocolate Muffins in this category.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is healthier: Cranberries and toasted almonds or Double Chocolate Muffins?

It depends on your goals. Cranberries and toasted almonds has 429 calories, while Double Chocolate Muffins has 175 calories. Check the detailed table above for sugar and fat content.

Is Cranberries and toasted almonds vegan?

No, Cranberries and toasted almonds is not certified vegan.

What is the calorie difference between Cranberries and toasted almonds and Double Chocolate Muffins?

There is a difference of 254 calories per 100g between the two products.

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