CHOCOLATEY COVERED MARSHMALLOW SANTAS vs WILLIAMS & BENNETT
Nutrition comparison per 100 g serving
Ad 468x60
It's a tie — both foods score equally across 10 nutrient categories
CHOCOLATEY COVERED MARSHMALLOW SANTAS: 4
vs
WILLIAMS & BENNETT: 4
(2 ties)
Overview
| Nutrient | CHOCOLATEY COVERED MARSHMALLOW SANTAS | WILLIAMS & BENNETT | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Calories | 409 cal | 500 cal | |
| Protein | 0 g | 6.7 g | |
| Carbs | 81.8 g | 66.7 g | |
| Fat | 9.1 g | 26.7 g | |
| Fiber | 0 g | 3.3 g | |
| Sugar | 0 g | 0 g | Tie |
Minerals
| Mineral | CHOCOLATEY COVERED MARSHMALLOW SANTAS | WILLIAMS & BENNETT | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Calcium, Ca | 9 MG | 0 MG | |
| Iron, Fe | 0 MG | 0 MG | Tie |
| Potassium, K | 145 MG | 0 MG | |
| Sodium, Na | 0 MG | 253 MG |