Comparison
Hüma Chia Energy Gel vs Creatine Monohydrate
Overall, Creatine Monohydrate has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 6 of our comparison points versus 2.
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Hüma Chia Energy Gel | Creatine Monohydrate |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | d | a |
| NOVA group | — | — |
| Calories | 278 kcal | 0 kcal |
| Fat | 2.8 g | 0 g |
| Saturated fat | 0 g | 0 g |
| Sugars | 44.4 g | 0 g |
| Salt | 0.8 g | 0 g |
| Fiber | 13.9 g | 0 g |
| Protein | 13.9 g | 0 g |
| Additives | 0 | 0 |
| Allergens | None listed | None listed |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Creatine Monohydrate has no calories, while Hüma Chia Energy Gel has 278 kcal.
- Creatine Monohydrate has no fat, while Hüma Chia Energy Gel has 2.8 g.
- Creatine Monohydrate has no sugar, while Hüma Chia Energy Gel has 44.4 g.
- Creatine Monohydrate has no salt, while Hüma Chia Energy Gel has 0.8 g.
- Hüma Chia Energy Gel has 100% more fiber (13.9 g vs 0 g).
- Hüma Chia Energy Gel has 100% more protein (13.9 g vs 0 g).
- Creatine Monohydrate has the better Nutri-Score.
Ingredients
Hüma Chia Energy Gel
Not available.
Creatine Monohydrate
Not available.
FAQ
Which is healthier: Hüma Chia Energy Gel or Creatine Monohydrate?
Overall, Creatine Monohydrate 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?
Creatine Monohydrate has fewer calories: 0 kcal versus 278 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Creatine Monohydrate has less sugar: 0 g versus 44.4 g per 100 g.