Comparison

Collagen Complete vs Italian Recipe Snack Tray

Overall, Collagen Complete has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 7 of our comparison points versus 2.

Nutrition per 100 g

NutrientCollagen CompleteItalian Recipe Snack Tray
Nutri-Score a e
NOVA group — 3
Calories 359 kcal 318 kcal
Fat 0 g 16.5 g
Saturated fat 0 g 8.2 g
Sugars 0 g 1.2 g
Salt 0.5 g 3.2 g
Fiber 0 g 1.2 g
Protein 87.7 g 21.2 g
Additives00
AllergensNone listedGluten, Milk, Soybeans

Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).

Key differences

  • Italian Recipe Snack Tray has 11% fewer calories (318 kcal vs 359 kcal).
  • Collagen Complete has no fat, while Italian Recipe Snack Tray has 16.5 g.
  • Collagen Complete has no saturated fat, while Italian Recipe Snack Tray has 8.2 g.
  • Collagen Complete has no sugar, while Italian Recipe Snack Tray has 1.2 g.
  • Collagen Complete has 84% less salt (0.5 g vs 3.2 g).
  • Italian Recipe Snack Tray has 100% more fiber (1.2 g vs 0 g).
  • Collagen Complete has 76% more protein (87.7 g vs 21.2 g).
  • Collagen Complete has the better Nutri-Score.
  • Only Italian Recipe Snack Tray lists: Gluten, Milk, Soybeans.

Ingredients

Collagen Complete

Hydrolyzed collagen (pasture-raised type I, II, III collagens)

Italian Recipe Snack Tray

PORK MEAT, SALT, CULTURED PASTEURIZED MILK, SALT, ENZYMES, UNBLEACHED AND UNBROMATED WHEAT FLOUR, WATER, SOYBEAN OIL, SOYBEAN VEGETABLE SHORTENING, MALT, PURIFIED SEA SALT, YEAST.

FAQ

Which is healthier: Collagen Complete or Italian Recipe Snack Tray?

Overall, Collagen Complete has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. We compare Nutri-Score, processing level and seven nutrients per 100 g. Your own needs (for example low sugar or high protein) may make a different choice better for you.

Which has fewer calories?

Italian Recipe Snack Tray has fewer calories: 318 kcal versus 359 kcal per 100 g.

Which has less sugar?

Collagen Complete has less sugar: 0 g versus 1.2 g per 100 g.

More comparisons