Head-to-Head Analysis

Italian Style Blend vs Natrel, lilimilk, 2% reduced fat chocolate milk

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

Top Pick
Package of Italian Style Blend

Italian Style Blend

Not Vegan
VS
Package of Natrel, lilimilk, 2% reduced fat chocolate milk

Natrel, lilimilk, 2% reduced fat chocolate milk

Not Vegan
Nutritional Facts (per 100g)
357.1 kcal
Energy
81 kcal
0g
Sugars
11.4g
25g
Fat
2.1g
28.6g
Protein
3.4g
1.8g
Salt
0.1g

The Verdict: Which is Better?

When placing Italian Style Blend and Natrel, lilimilk, 2% reduced fat chocolate milk 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.

Italian Style Blend is the more energy-dense option here, packing 276 more calories per 100g than Natrel, lilimilk, 2% reduced fat chocolate milk. If you are looking for sustained energy or fueling a workout, this higher caloric density might be an advantage.

In terms of sugar control, Italian Style Blend takes the lead with only 0g of sugar per 100g, whereas Natrel, lilimilk, 2% reduced fat chocolate milk contains 11.44g. Lower sugar content is often linked to better metabolic health.

Looking to build muscle? Italian Style Blend offers a protein boost with 28.57g per 100g, outperforming Natrel, lilimilk, 2% reduced fat chocolate milk in this category.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is healthier: Italian Style Blend or Natrel, lilimilk, 2% reduced fat chocolate milk?

It depends on your goals. Italian Style Blend has 357.14 calories, while Natrel, lilimilk, 2% reduced fat chocolate milk has 81 calories. Check the detailed table above for sugar and fat content.

Is Italian Style Blend vegan?

No, Italian Style Blend is not certified vegan.

What is the calorie difference between Italian Style Blend and Natrel, lilimilk, 2% reduced fat chocolate milk?

There is a difference of 276 calories per 100g between the two products.

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