FRANKFORD vs CHOCOLATY COATED MARSHMALLOW
Nutrition comparison per 100 g serving
Ad 468x60
CHOCOLATY COATED MARSHMALLOW wins in 4 out of 11 nutrient categories
FRANKFORD: 1
vs
CHOCOLATY COATED MARSHMALLOW: 4
(6 ties)
Overview
| Nutrient | FRANKFORD | CHOCOLATY COATED MARSHMALLOW | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Calories | 429 cal | 381 cal | |
| Protein | 0 g | 0 g | Tie |
| Carbs | 100 g | 76.2 g | |
| Fat | 0 g | 8.3 g | |
| Fiber | 0 g | 0 g | Tie |
| Sugar | 0 g | 0 g | Tie |
Vitamins
| Vitamin | FRANKFORD | CHOCOLATY COATED MARSHMALLOW | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vitamin D (D2 + D3) | 0 UG | 0 UG | Tie |
Minerals
| Mineral | FRANKFORD | CHOCOLATY COATED MARSHMALLOW | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Calcium, Ca | 0 MG | 0 MG | Tie |
| Iron, Fe | 0 MG | 0.9 MG | |
| Potassium, K | 0 MG | 0 MG | Tie |
| Sodium, Na | 0 MG | 83 MG |