Head-to-Head Analysis

Himalayan pink salt lentil chips imp vs Sweet Chili Kettle Cooked Potato Chips

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

Top Pick
Package of Himalayan pink salt lentil chips imp

Himalayan pink salt lentil chips imp

Not Vegan
VS
Package of Sweet Chili Kettle Cooked Potato Chips

Sweet Chili Kettle Cooked Potato Chips

Not Vegan
Nutritional Facts (per 100g)
500 kcal
Energy
535.7 kcal
0g
Sugars
7.1g
25g
Fat
28.6g
14.3g
Protein
7.1g
2g
Salt
1.7g

The Verdict: Which is Better?

When placing Himalayan pink salt lentil chips imp and Sweet Chili Kettle Cooked 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, Himalayan pink salt lentil chips imp is the clear winner. With 36 fewer calories per 100g than its competitor, it allows for more volume while keeping your energy intake in check.

In terms of sugar control, Himalayan pink salt lentil chips imp takes the lead with only 0g of sugar per 100g, whereas Sweet Chili Kettle Cooked Potato Chips contains 7.1428571428571g. Lower sugar content is often linked to better metabolic health.

Looking to build muscle? Himalayan pink salt lentil chips imp offers a protein boost with 14.285714285714g per 100g, outperforming Sweet Chili Kettle Cooked Potato Chips in this category.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is healthier: Himalayan pink salt lentil chips imp or Sweet Chili Kettle Cooked Potato Chips?

Himalayan pink salt lentil chips imp appears to be the healthier option generally, as it has less sugar and fewer calories.

Is Himalayan pink salt lentil chips imp vegan?

No, Himalayan pink salt lentil chips imp is not certified vegan.

What is the calorie difference between Himalayan pink salt lentil chips imp and Sweet Chili Kettle Cooked Potato Chips?

There is a difference of 36 calories per 100g between the two products.

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