Head-to-Head Analysis

Tomato basil italian style slow simmered soup vs Chicken Gumbo Condensed soup

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

Package of Tomato basil italian style slow simmered soup

Tomato basil italian style slow simmered soup

Not Vegan
VS
Top Pick
Package of Chicken Gumbo Condensed soup

Chicken Gumbo Condensed soup

Not Vegan
Nutritional Facts (per 100g)
40.2 kcal
Energy
70 kcal
4.4g
Sugars
2g
1.2g
Fat
2g
0.8g
Protein
2g
0.7g
Salt
1.7g

The Verdict: Which is Better?

When placing Tomato basil italian style slow simmered soup and Chicken Gumbo Condensed soup 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, Tomato basil italian style slow simmered soup is the clear winner. With 30 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. Tomato basil italian style slow simmered soup contains significantly more sugar (4.4176706827309g) compared to the milder Chicken Gumbo Condensed soup (2g). If you are monitoring your insulin levels or trying to cut down on sweets, Chicken Gumbo Condensed soup is undeniably the healthier pick.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is healthier: Tomato basil italian style slow simmered soup or Chicken Gumbo Condensed soup?

It depends on your goals. Tomato basil italian style slow simmered soup has 40.160642570281 calories, while Chicken Gumbo Condensed soup has 70 calories. Check the detailed table above for sugar and fat content.

Is Tomato basil italian style slow simmered soup vegan?

No, Tomato basil italian style slow simmered soup is not certified vegan.

What is the calorie difference between Tomato basil italian style slow simmered soup and Chicken Gumbo Condensed soup?

There is a difference of 30 calories per 100g between the two products.

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