I am currently in Canada, Huel-less. I came across this: https://holfood.com/
Advertised as ‘Canada’s answer to Huel’.
(Huel is not available in Canada)
The marketing seems similar.
Have there ever been any comparison studies comparing the nutritional benefits of Huel versus Hol?
They have multiple errors in the ingredients list, so their attention to detail is very poor and I wouldn’t trust them to produce a quality product.
Using added sugar is also a poor choice.
400 mg cholesterol per 2000kcal is also bad.
Multiple errors?
It means two or more.
What are the errors?
Putting whey powder is one - milk is for baby cows.
Added cane sugar. Why?
But as for errors in the listings - dunno I haven’t examined it closely.
Hol Chocolate claims 25% of Daily Value for saturated fat in one 400kc serving, and 27% of Daily Value for cholesterol. Seems anyone requiring more than 1600kc daily is going to be OTT. Yet: ‘Hol Food can be used to replace all of your meals’.
also: ‘Our current version of Mild Vanilla is essentially unflavoured for those who prefer an unflavoured option’. ???
PS for what it’s worth the ingredients list could indeed do with a quick once-over:
'Whey Protein Powder, Rice Flour, Whole Milk Powder, Hemp Seed Oil Power, Organic Cane Sugar, Vitamin and Mineral Mix […], Natural Flavours.
But most important - hunzas is right - there’s no way this is ‘Canada’s answer to Huel’ unless and until it’s vegan.
At £2 a meal (one off price) it seems pretty pricey for what it is 19% more than Huel Core powder one off price – but I’m not sure what the cost of living is in Canada so maybe that’s what the price point is. Canada’s answer to Huel – was that like a Jeopardy style marketing question: What global brand style can Spinoza Life Sciences Inc. slavishly plagiarise?
I think if you’re looking for an alternative to Huel in Canada – you’d be better off going with Soylent - which is available there and the same price as Huel.
Re typos and attention to detail, seems only fair to point out that Huel still has incorrect nutritional information for Essential’s fat content (% RI per 2000kcal) - listed as 35%, tho’ correct number is 63%.
also nutritional information for v3.1’s fat RIs at 2000kc is interesting:
apparently, 17 x 5 = 85 for Chocolate but 17 x 5 = 60 for Banana. 
Did you let Huel know about these errors?
Yes, Dan said they’d be changed, but it’s only been a month and everyone must be very busy.
Holiday season and those Huel branded hammocks don’t put themselves up.
don’t they have staff for that?
Sorry! Sadly Dan isn’t with us anymore so I’ll pick up his request with our website team 
RIP Dan. You’ll be missed like original Mac and cheese and granola.
I wonder what Huel’s legal team would have to say about ‘Hol’ and their branding. Not just the similar name but the font, basic colour scheme etc.
I assume it’s just a generic internet marketing template, rented without exclusivity.
But if Huel made it and owns it… 
I meant the website design and layout.
