PRICE
Feed £3.50 a bar (100g) (fixed price per bar, no discount)
Huel £1.48 a bar (64g) (bigger discount the more you buy!)
TASTE
Feed Sweet, sugary, like a treat. Great texture
Huel Stiff, dry, bland
Nutrition
Feed (400kal a bar) has more carbs & sugar per 100g *see above post RE isomaltulose
Huel (250kal a bar) has more protein and fibre.
SUMMARY
The price alone makes this a dealbreaker. Plus Feed needs a minimum order amount. It tastes great and you do get 100g per bar opposed to 64g per bar in Huel. I tried the chocolate and the chocolate and banana. They both tasted lovely but so does those pots of avocado & eggs from M&S. The point i’m making is it’s cheaper at this price point to buy a meal wherever you are vs buying a Feed bar.
Feed opened up a UK base so I thought that since they did this, their products may be cheaper than before.
The bottom line is it’s cheaper to buy and eat 2 Huel bars vs 1 Feed bar. If they reduced their pricing, I’d actually buy them but at the moment i’m sticking to Huel. Sorry Feed, reduce your price.
Are you sure that Feed doesn’t offer discounts on quantity, on their UK webshop? Here is what I read on https://shop.feed.co/uk_en/ : -10% when you spend £100, -15% when £150 and -20% when £200. And Free european delivery on orders over £70, too.
@Raymondcal Looks like your right with the discount. Still, even with a discount, it’s way above the Huel price and that’s spending £100 on bars just to get 10% !
For those interested in the exact price difference, with the 20% discount on Feed bars vs the maximum discount on Huel bars with a subscription, you get the following:
Huel: 80 bars of 250 calories each (20000 calories) for £112.50.
Feed: 58 bars of 400 calories each (23200 calories) for £162.40.
This works out to £0.005625 per calorie for Huel bars at their best value, and £0.007 per calorie for Feed bars. As such, on a per calorie basis, Feed bars are 24.444% more expensive than Huel bars.
And finally, if someone decides to consume 2000 calories per day of each bar type, they would pay £11.25 for Huel bars and £14.00 for Feed bars.
I think Feed lowered the prices in their products recently,
One bar is £3.00 or £0.0075/kcal. (assuming 400kcal per bar which varies a little)
96 bars (so we apply the discount) is £230 or £2.4/bar or £0.00599/kcal.
Just for your information, if you comment anything on social networks about feed (example : you give your opinion), if it is not 100% favorable to the feed brand, you immediately get banned
All non 100% favorable comments are deleted within an hour maximum
Oh really? I added that many chocolate bars on their site and checked the price, but I didn’t progress through checkout.
Checking again though you are right, I guess they updated very recently. You now need 67 bars to get the maximal discount, so that’s 67 bars of 400 calories (or 26800 calories) for £160.80, or £0.006 per calorie. So still more expensive than Huel bars per calorie, but only 6.667% more expensive, not the 24.444% I had in my previous post. Well spotted.
That’s £12 per 2000 calories of Feed bars vs the £11.25 per 2000 calories of Huel bars for those interested.
Buying 67 bars and spending £160 on bars isn’t practical.
I like having bars I can throw in the bag on odd days and 67 bars could well go off the BBE date. I’m struggling to eat 2 boxes of Huel bars to make sure I eat them before they go rock hard past the best by date.
I can’t really be bothered to do an in-depth analysis of the article - the cherry-picking of stats in it to make Feed appear better is there for anyone to see.
However one particular part surprised me enough to research further:
“Huel’s bottles are composed of 25% recycled plastic, whereas ours are 30%. This is the maximum legal amount.”
Bold above is for emphasis. This… did not make sense to me, so I decided to research if further. It certainly seems like an odd limit given that in October 2018, MEPs voted to require a minimum of 35% recycled plastic in bottles by 2025 (https://www.mrw.co.uk/latest/meps-vote-for-35-minimum-recycled-content-in-plastic-bottles/10036104.article). So unless anyone is aware of contradictory information, this part seems like an outright lie - and that’s far worse than simple cherry-picking of data and may even be a breach of the law.
I found that comparison pretty hard to follow and came away still wanting to see the ingredients and nutritional composition side by side.
The only value they mentioned in relation to nutrition was the protein content.
I would have liked it to be much more comprehensive.
I’ve not tried feed. I’ve heard it tastes good. But has higher sugar content.
For me Huel UU tastes perfect and suits my needs exactly.
I think my ad blockers make the forum editor run very slow and typing is delayed when I reply here.
