Head-to-Head Analysis

Jack link's, beef jerky, sweet & hot vs Ruffels, Potato Chips

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

Package of Jack link's, beef jerky, sweet & hot

Jack link's, beef jerky, sweet & hot

Not Vegan
VS
Top Pick
Package of Ruffels, Potato Chips

Ruffels, Potato Chips

Not Vegan
Nutritional Facts (per 100g)
286 kcal
Energy
565 kcal
28.6g
Sugars
3.5g
5.4g
Fat
35.3g
32.1g
Protein
7.1g
2.5g
Salt
1.4g

The Verdict: Which is Better?

When placing Jack link's, beef jerky, sweet & hot and Ruffels, 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, Jack link's, beef jerky, sweet & hot is the clear winner. With 279 fewer calories per 100g than its competitor, it allows for more volume while keeping your energy intake in check.

However, watch out for the sugar content. Jack link's, beef jerky, sweet & hot contains significantly more sugar (28.6g) compared to the milder Ruffels, Potato Chips (3.53g). If you are monitoring your insulin levels or trying to cut down on sweets, Ruffels, Potato Chips is undeniably the healthier pick.

Looking to build muscle? Jack link's, beef jerky, sweet & hot offers a protein boost with 32.1g per 100g, outperforming Ruffels, Potato Chips in this category.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is healthier: Jack link's, beef jerky, sweet & hot or Ruffels, Potato Chips?

It depends on your goals. Jack link's, beef jerky, sweet & hot has 286 calories, while Ruffels, Potato Chips has 565 calories. Check the detailed table above for sugar and fat content.

Is Jack link's, beef jerky, sweet & hot vegan?

No, Jack link's, beef jerky, sweet & hot is not certified vegan.

What is the calorie difference between Jack link's, beef jerky, sweet & hot and Ruffels, Potato Chips?

There is a difference of 279 calories per 100g between the two products.

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