Amla vs Phalsa

Per 100 g, Amla has 23 kcal and 0.3 g protein, while Phalsa has 71 kcal and 1.7 g protein.

Amla

23
kcal per 100 g
0.3 g protein

Phalsa

71
kcal per 100 g
1.7 g protein

Nutrition compared, per 100 g

Both foods are shown per 100 g so the numbers are directly comparable. A single serving of each is a different size, so serving-for-serving figures would not tell you much.

Nutrient Amla Phalsa Difference
Calories Fewer calories for the same weight 23 kcal better 71 kcal 67%
Protein More protein helps with fullness and muscle 0.3 g 1.7 g better 82%
Carbs Lower carbs suits low-carb and diabetic diets 4.3 g better 15.1 g 72%
Fat Lower fat means lower calorie density 0 g better 0.1 g 100%
Fiber More fibre improves fullness and digestion 7.7 g better 4.5 g 42%
Sugar Less sugar means a gentler blood-sugar response 3.3 g better 13 g 75%
"Better" marks the more favourable value for a general healthy-eating goal, not a judgement about the food overall. Differences under 5% are treated as equivalent.

Which is better for weight loss?

Amla

Amla is the lighter choice at 23 kcal per 100 g against 71 for Phalsa — about 67% fewer calories for the same weight on your plate. That does not make Phalsa a bad food; it means the portion has to be smaller to fit the same calorie budget.

Which is better for muscle gain?

Phalsa

Phalsa is the stronger protein source, with 1.7 g per 100 g against 0.3 g for Amla. To match that from Amla you would have to eat roughly 5.7 times the volume, which is usually the limiting factor when you are trying to hit a protein target.

Amla vs Phalsa — common questions

Phalsa has more calories — about 71 kcal per 100 g compared with 23 kcal for Amla.

Phalsa has more protein — 1.7 g per 100 g against 0.3 g for Amla.

Amla is the lighter choice at 23 kcal per 100 g against 71 for Phalsa — about 67% fewer calories for the same weight on your plate. That does not make Phalsa a bad food; it means the portion has to be smaller to fit the same calorie budget.

Phalsa is the stronger protein source, with 1.7 g per 100 g against 0.3 g for Amla. To match that from Amla you would have to eat roughly 5.7 times the volume, which is usually the limiting factor when you are trying to hit a protein target.

Yes. Combining them gives roughly 94 kcal and 2 g protein per 100 g of each. Indian meals are usually built from pairs like this, and mixing a grain with a protein source generally makes for a better-balanced plate than either on its own.

For most everyday goals Amla has the edge, mainly on calorie density. Per 100 g, Amla has 23 kcal and 0.3 g protein, while Phalsa has 71 kcal and 1.7 g protein. Healthy eating depends far more on total daily intake and portion size than on picking one of these two.
Full Amla nutrition & serving sizes
Full Phalsa nutrition & serving sizes

Data source: nutrition values are drawn from the Indian Nutrient Databank (INDB), Vijayakumar et al., Curr Dev Nutr 2024;8(7):103790, used under CC BY 4.0, and derived from the ICMR-NIN Indian Food Composition Tables. Values vary with recipe, oil used and regional style.

General information only, not medical advice. See our disclaimer.