We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to use this site we will assume that you are happy with it.

Shakeology vs. SlimFast – Choose Wisely

Weight Loss & Diets | Written by Nathan | Updated on 9 August 2022

Choosing between Shakeology vs. SlimFast can be a battle since they both taste like protein heavy decadent desserts and call themselves the best! It’s no wonder that meal replacement shakes like SlimFast and Shakeology are so popular.

While everyone has their preference on their favorite meal replacement or protein shake, one may be better for weight loss while the other might taste better so choose wisely. 

Macronutrients Values Between Shakeology & SlimFast

Macronutrients paints part of the picture when it comes to which is best for losing weight or overall fitness. These are essential to build muscle, keep energy levels up, essential bodily functions, and more.

Let’s compare the nutritional values of Shakeology and SlimFast and see which one is best for weight loss.

Shakeology vs. SlimFast – 1 Serving
Nutrient Shakeology (42 g) SlimFast (26 g)
Calories 160 110
Fat 2.5 g 4 g
Sodium 170 mg 125 mg
Carbs 10 g 18 g
Fiber 6 g 4 g
Total Sugar 7 g 22 g
Added Sugar 5 g 9 g
Protein 17 g 5 g

As you can tell, a serving of Shakeology is larger than that of SlimFast, but it has fewer calories and carbs than the same amount of SlimFast. This fact also means you get more protein for fewer calories. You need protein to heal your muscles after a hard workout since our muscle fibers consist of protein [1]. 

Shakeology does have more sodium per serving  than SlimFast, which can bloat you up, but it contains less craving-inducing added sugar. Plus, you can drink more of it for just 50 extra calories! So, Shakeology seems to be a better bet nutrition-wise.

The low calories might make shakes seem like a weight loss hack for lazy people, but the ingredients matter, too!

Difference in Ingredients – Shakeology vs. SlimFast

Both Shakeology and SlimFast aim to provide dieters with most of the essential nutrients they’d get from a meal. However, their ingredients differ wildly and can have varying benefits and side effects.

A chocolate flavored SlimFast shake has these ingredients, along with their significant benefits or side effects [2][3]: 

  • Sunflower creamer
  • Canola oil
  • Maltodextrin
  • Milk protein concentrate
  • Alkalized cocoa powder
  • Cellulose gel
  • Cellulose gum
  • Xanthan gum
  • Gellan gum
  • Mono and diglycerides
  • Potassium phosphate
  • Potassium citrate 
  • Acesulfame potassium
  • Soy lecithin
  • Carrageenan
  • Aspartame

In comparison, Shakeology has the following ingredients [4]:

  • Flax
  • Rice protein
  • Quinoa
  • Pea protein
  • Whey
  • Acerola cherry
  • Blueberry
  • Camu-camu
  • Lycium berry
  • Rosehips
  • Pomegranate
  • Schisandra
  • Luo Han Guo
  • While Coffee Fruit
  • Cocoa
  • Chicory root
  • Yacon root
  • Bacillus coagulans
  • Digestive enzymes
  • Pea fiber
  • Astragalus
  • Cordyceps
  • Ashwagandha
  • Chaga
  • Maitake
  • Reishi
  • Maca
  • Spinach
  • Kale
  • Matcha Green Tea
  • Chlorella
  • Cinnamon

It’s clear that Shakeology has more wholesome ingredients. Even if the exact amounts are miniscule, the vitamins, micronutrients and phytonutrients can assist in curbing hunger and meeting nutrient needs in restrictive diets

Comparing Micronutrients of Shakeology & SlimFast

Now that you know what goes into these shakes, let’s look at the vitamins and minerals each contains:

Shakeology vs. SlimFast – 1 Serving
Nutrient SlimFast (26 g) Shakeology (42 g)
Vitamin D 2.5 mcg 20 mcg
Calcium 190 mg 260 mg
Iron 6.3 mg 4 mg
Potassium 260 mg 460 mg
Vitamin A 150 mcg 315 mcg
Vitamin C 27 g 180 mg
Vitamin E 13.5 mg 5.25 mg
Vitamin K 20 mcg 42 mcg
Thiamine 0.3 mg 0.42 mg
Riboflavin 0.18 mg 0.46 mg
Niacine 5 mg 0 mg
Vitamin B6 0.5 mg 0.85 mg
Folate 100 mcg 200 mcg
Vitamin B12 1 mcg 1.2 mcg
Biotin 10 mcg 10.5 mcg
Pantothenic Acid 1 mg 0 mg
Phosphorus 80 mg  
Iodine 15 mcg 52.5 mcg
Magnesium 90 mg 147 mg
Zinc 3.3 mg 5.5 mg
Selenium 16 mcg 19.25 mcg
Copper 0.18 mg 0 mg
Manganese 0.7 mg 0 mg
Chromium 10 mcg 12.25 mcg
Molybdenum 15 mcg 0 mcg

Clearly, Shakeology contains more natural ingredients than SlimFast. Both Shakeology and SlimFast contain ingredients that lower cholesterol, regulate blood sugar, and promote heart health, like cocoa powder and flax, which is good for weight loss [5][6]. However, Shakeology also has more sources of protein and fiber, so it makes you feel full quicker [7]. Ingredients like blueberry act as antioxidants as well, warding off inflammation and disease [8].

Shakeology also has a more significant number of essential vitamins and minerals, so it’s more likely to fulfill your daily requirement than Slimfast. Hence, Shakeology is a better option when it comes to ingredients.

But the ingredients aren’t the most crucial part for many people – the cost is what makes or breaks it.

Costs of Shakeology & SlimFast

A 12.83 oz (14 servings) can of SlimFast Original shake mix in the flavor Rich Chocolate Royale is $9.99 on the SlimFast website and $6.88 at Walmart. Meanwhile, a 30-serving Shakeology Chocolate Whey Protein Shake Mix bag is $129.95.

So, a serving of SlimFast is $3.62 cheaper than Shakeology – a vast difference. While Shakeology does give you the convenience of a monthly subscription plan, the benefits can’t wholly outweigh the affordability of SlimFast.

The Taste of Slimfast vs. Shakeology

While taste is subjective, we personally prefer Shakeology chocolate flavor over Slimfasts’ chocolate flavor. However, many online reviews have touted Slimfast to be better and less chalky nearly a decade ago, but formula changes have put Shakeology in the lead as far as overall flavor goes – no matter the flavor in question.

Both will taste a little chalky and odd if it’s the very first meal replacement or protein shake someone tries, but in time, the consistency and chalkiness become something that can be enjoyable.

Shakeology vs. SlimFast – Which is Better Overall?

If your goal is weight loss and good health, and you can afford to spend some money on these goals, then Shakeology is your best bet. It has less sodium, sugar, and carbs per serving than SlimFast and contains many more natural and beneficial ingredients. Plus, buying it every month is pretty straightforward with a monthly subscription.

However, SlimFast is still a great meal replacement shake if you can’t spend as much. It contains many of the essential nutrients you need every day, and while it might have less protein, you can also buy more of it for the same amount of money.

Ultimately, the choice comes down to your budget and your taste. If you can afford it, go for Shakeology since it’s the clear winner in every category other than price. Otherwise, SlimFast or making your own meal replacement are fair options that can provide great results. 

Best Shakeology & SlimFast Alternatives

Shakeology and SlimFast aren’t your only choices for meal replacements. There are countless shakes on the market, including excellent brands like Vega, Orgain, Pure Protein, etc. You can try any number of these brands and see which ones you like best. 

Protein shakes are excellent for weight loss, but you might not want to spend too much money on them. In that case, try making a protein shake at home. All you need is some protein powder, any milk of your choice, a healthy sweetener like honey, and any other ingredients – nuts, yogurt, peanut butter, veggies, fruit, or anything else you like. Blend it up and enjoy!

And if you’re wondering when is it too late to drink a protein shake, it’s essentially never by the type of protein makes a difference as well as your goals. 

Of course, you should consider that, as healthy as most meal replacement shakes are, your weight loss goals should also include developing a wholesome relationship with food rather than just shedding pounds. So, Shakeology vs. SlimFast, no matter which option you go with, keep your goals in mind, remember to indulge once in a while, and choose wisely.

References

[1] Helms, E. R., Zinn, C., Rowlands, D. S., & Brown, S. R. (2014). A systematic review of dietary protein during caloric restriction in resistance trained lean athletes: a case for higher intakes. International journal of sport nutrition and exercise metabolism, 24(2), 127–138. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24092765/ 

[2] SlimFast Store. (2022). SlimFast Meal Replacement Powder, Original Rich Chocolate Royale, Weight Loss Shake Mix, 10g of Protein, 34 Servings. Amazon. https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0008IVPB2/ 

[3] SlimFast Store. (2022). SlimFast Advanced Nutrition High Protein Meal Replacement Shake, Creamy Chocolate, 20g of Ready to Drink Protein, 11 Fl. Oz Bottle, 4 Count (Pack of 3). Amazon. https://www.amazon.com/SlimFast-Advanced-Nutrition-Creamy-Chocolate/dp/B0187HZG2E/ 

[4] Team Beachbody. (2022). Shop Shakeology — The Nutrition Your Body Craves. Team Beachbody. https://www.teambeachbody.com/shop/us/shakeology/ingredients 

[5] Ried, K., Fakler, P., & Stocks, N. P. (2017). Effect of cocoa on blood pressure. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 4(4), CD008893. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28439881/ 

[6] Kajla, P., Sharma, A., & Sood, D. R. (2015). Flaxseed-a potential functional food source. Journal of food science and technology, 52(4), 1857–1871. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4375225/ 

[7] Halton, T. L., & Hu, F. B. (2004). The effects of high protein diets on thermogenesis, satiety and weight loss: a critical review. Journal of the American College of Nutrition, 23(5), 373–385. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15466943/ 

[8] Prior, R. L., Cao, G., Prior, R. L., & Cao, G. (2000). Analysis of botanicals and dietary supplements for antioxidant capacity: a review. Journal of AOAC International, 83(4), 950–956. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10995120/ 

About the Author

Nathan

Nathan has been a fitness enthusiast for the past 12 years and jumps between several types of training such as bodybuilding, powerlifting, cycling, gymnastics, and backcountry hiking. Due to the varying caloric needs of numerous sports, he has cycled between all types of diets and currently eats a whole food diet. In addition, Nathan lives with several injuries such as hip impingement, spondylolisthesis, and scoliosis, so he underwent self-rehabilitation and no longer lives with debilitating pain.