Triscuit vs Wheat Thins: Which Wheat Cracker Wins?
The two best mainstream crackers we've graded, head-to-head — and both happen to land the same letter. Each is built on whole-grain wheat, which puts them a class above the refined-flour cheese crackers. Triscuit takes it by a single point on a cleaner three-ingredient label and no added sugar; Wheat Thins fights back with far more fiber. Every number below is pulled live from each product's graded fact sheet.
The short answer
Triscuit Original is the pick — narrowly — at B- (74/100). Its whole appeal is on the back of the box: a three-word ingredient list — whole-grain wheat, canola oil, sea salt — with no added sugar and the lowest sodium of any cracker in our set (160mg). It earns a B+ for ingredient quality, the best in the category.
Wheat Thins Original lands at B- (71/100), one point back — but it is not out-classed. It's out-scored on ingredient simplicity, because it sneaks in added sugar (4g) plus malt and refiner's syrup that Triscuit doesn't carry. What it wins, and wins big, is fiber: 3.01g per serving against the g the USDA records for Triscuit.
The honest hierarchy: Triscuit is the cleanest cracker, Wheat Thins is the whole-grain one with an asterisk (the sweetener) and a genuine fiber advantage. Both grade B- because the trade-offs nearly cancel. If you want the shortest, no-sugar label, choose Triscuit; if you want the fiber and don't mind a few grams of added sugar, Wheat Thins is the defensible pick.
Side-by-side
| Triscuit Original | Wheat Thins Original | |
|---|---|---|
| Labelgrade | B- 74 / 100 | B- 71 / 100 |
| Serving size | 28 g | 31 g |
| Protein per serving | 3 g | 2 g |
| Protein per 100 g | 10.7 g | 6.5 g |
| Calories per serving | 120 | 140 |
| Calories per g protein | 40 | 70 |
| Fiber per serving | g | 3.01 g |
| Total sugar | 0 g | 5 g |
| Added sugar | 0 g | 4 g |
| Saturated fat per serving | 0 g | 0 g |
| Sodium per serving | 160 mg | 200 mg |
| Sodium per 100 g | 571 mg | 645 mg |
| Ingredient count | 3 | 8 |
| First ingredient | Whole-grain wheat | Whole-grain wheat flour |
| Protein density grade | C+ | C |
| Ingredient quality grade | B+ | B- |
| Sugar grade | A+ | B- |
| Sodium grade | D | F |
| Saturated fat grade | A+ | A+ |
| Fiber grade | F | A+ |
Where Triscuit wins
- The cleanest label on the shelf. Three ingredients — whole-grain wheat, canola oil, sea salt — and nothing else. That earns a B+ for ingredient quality, the highest of any cracker we've graded, and it's the single biggest reason Triscuit edges ahead.
- No added sugar. 0g of sugar, zero added (grade A+). Wheat Thins carries 4g of added sugar; if your one rule is "no sweetener in my cracker," Triscuit passes and Wheat Thins doesn't.
- Lower sodium. 160mg per serving vs Wheat Thins' 200mg — about 571mg per 100g against 645mg. Both grade in the D–F band, but Triscuit is the lighter pour.
- Fewer calories and a sturdier base. 120 calories per serving vs 140, and the dense woven texture holds a topping — cheese, tuna, hummus — without snapping. It's the better cracker for building a mini-meal.
Where Wheat Thins wins
- Far more fiber. 3.01g per serving (grade A+) against the g the USDA records for Triscuit (grade F). This is the surprise of the matchup and Wheat Thins' decisive win — if fiber is what you're after, it's not even close.
- The more-ish crunch. Thinner and crispier than a dense Triscuit, with a faint sweetness (that's the added sugar at work) that makes them genuinely snackable on their own, no topping required.
- Still genuinely whole-grain. Whole-grain wheat flour is the first ingredient, so the health-halo claim is earned at the base — Wheat Thins is a real whole-grain cracker, just one that's been lightly sweetened.
- Zero saturated fat. 0g, matching Triscuit's 0g — both score A+ here, a shared strength.
Where it's a tie
- The grade. Both land B- — 74 vs 71, a single point — reached by opposite routes (Triscuit on ingredients, Wheat Thins on fiber).
- Saturated fat. 0g vs 0g, both grading A+ — neither has a saturated-fat problem.
- Whole-grain foundation. Both lead with whole-grain wheat, the thing that lifts them above the refined-flour cheese crackers in the first place.
- Modest protein. 3g vs 2g per serving — close, and neither is a protein source. Top them, don't rely on them.
Which should you buy
Buy Triscuit if ingredient simplicity is your priority, you want zero added sugar, or you're topping the cracker with cheese, tuna, or a spread. It's the cleanest cracker in the aisle, the lowest in sodium, and the sturdier base — the technical winner, and the right call if "shortest label" is your rule.
Buy Wheat Thins if fiber is what you care about most, or you want a crispier, faintly-sweet cracker you'll happily eat plain. It loses the overall by a point, but its fiber win is real and large, and a few grams of added sugar is a fair price if that's the trade you want to make.
Either way, you're choosing well. These are the two highest-grading mainstream crackers we cover, and a one-point gap between two B-s is close to a coin flip. The deciding question is simple: do you weight a three-ingredient, no-sugar label (Triscuit) or a big fiber number (Wheat Thins)? Both still lean salty, so portion either one and pair it with a real protein. For where they sit against the whole field — including the refined-flour crackers they both beat — see the crackers report card.
How they were graded
Both products use the v3 6-dimension Labelgrade formula (see /methodology): protein density 23% + ingredient quality 21% + saturated fat 18% + sodium 15% + sugar 15% + fiber 8%. Triscuit data from USDA FDC 1461209; Wheat Thins data from USDA FDC 2181586. Every figure on this page is read live from each product's record at build time, so the numbers can't drift out of sync with the individual fact sheets.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is healthier — Triscuit or Wheat Thins?
It's close: Triscuit scores B- (74/100) and Wheat Thins scores B- (71/100) — the same letter grade, one point apart. Both are whole-grain-wheat crackers, which puts them ahead of refined-flour cheese crackers. Triscuit edges it on a cleaner three-ingredient label with no added sugar and lower sodium; Wheat Thins counters with dramatically more fiber. They're the two best mainstream crackers we've graded, and which "wins" depends on whether you weight ingredient simplicity or fiber more heavily.
Which has cleaner ingredients?
Triscuit, clearly, and it's the main reason it edges ahead. Triscuit's entire ingredient list is three things — whole-grain wheat, canola oil, sea salt — earning a B+ on ingredient quality. Wheat Thins runs eight ingredients and scores B-: still whole-grain-wheat-first and genuinely decent, but it adds sugar (the third ingredient), malt syrup, and refiner's syrup. If your rule is "the shortest list with nothing sweet in it," Triscuit wins outright.
Does Wheat Thins have added sugar?
Yes — 5g of total sugar per serving, 4g of it added, from sugar, malt syrup, and refiner's syrup. That's about 8% of the day's added-sugar allowance — modest, but it's the single thing separating Wheat Thins from a barer cracker. Triscuit, by contrast, lists 0g of sugar and zero added. Most people don't expect sugar in a cracker called "Wheat Thins," which is exactly why it's worth flagging.
Which has more fiber?
Wheat Thins, and it isn't close. Wheat Thins delivers 3.01g of fiber per serving (grade A+) — excellent for a cracker — while the USDA entry for Triscuit lists undefinedg, grading F. That's the surprise of this matchup: Triscuit looks like the more wholesome, whole-grain cracker, but on the fiber line as recorded, Wheat Thins decisively outperforms it. If fiber is your priority, Wheat Thins is the pick despite the added sugar.
Why does Triscuit win overall if Wheat Thins has so much more fiber?
Because fiber is only 8% of the score, while ingredient quality (22%) and the sugar and sodium dimensions weigh more. Triscuit's three-ingredient, no-added-sugar label (B+ ingredients, A+ sugar) plus its lower sodium (160mg vs 200mg) add up to slightly more than Wheat Thins' big fiber win. The result is 74 to 71 — a one-point margin. Both land at B-; they just get there differently.
Which cracker is better for topping with cheese or tuna?
Triscuit, on sturdiness. Its dense, woven whole-wheat texture holds up under a slab of cheese, a scoop of tuna salad, or a spread without snapping — turning a 3g-protein cracker into a genuine mini-meal once you add a protein on top. Wheat Thins are thinner and crispier, better for snacking by the handful than as a base. For a cracker-plus-protein plate, Triscuit is the better vehicle. See the full <a href="/report-card/crackers">crackers report card</a> for how both rank against the field.