The Unhealthiest Fast-Food Chicken Tenders, Ranked

By analyzing nutrition labels for six fast-food chicken tender options, Ali Musa found some chains can be a “better for you” choice—while Popeyes ranked as the unhealthiest.

By Ali Musa
Wellness Desk – Health & Nutrition Monitoring.

Chicken tenders remain a popular fast-food order, but not all options carry the same nutritional trade-offs. Ali Musa, writing for Axadle’s Wellness Desk, analyzed nutrition labels for six brands of soft drinks and used the same monitoring approach to compare factors relevant to chicken tender nutrition—such as sodium, saturated fat, and total calories—across the listed fast-food offerings.

Below is the ranking, from the least worst option to the unhealthiest. Nutrition figures are listed per serving described in the feed content (generally “3 chicken tenders”).

Sonic Crispy Tender

Nutrition (per 3 chicken tenders):

• Calories: 260
• Fat: 12 g (Saturated fat: 1 g)
• Sodium: 730 mg
• Carbohydrates: 16 g (fibre: 2 g, sugar: 0 g)
• Protein: 21 g

In the feed content, Sonic is described as having the lowest calories and saturated fat overall, with sodium and carbohydrates also characterized as moderate compared with the other options listed.

Chick-fil-A Chick-n-Strips

Nutrition (per 3 chicken tenders):

• Calories: 310
• Fat: 14 g (Saturated fat: 2.5 g)
• Sodium: 870 mg
• Carbohydrates: 16 g (fibre: 0 g, sugar: 2 g)
• Protein: 29 g

The feed content says the Chick-fil-A option is low in calories and saturated fat and higher in protein, with sodium described as “moderate,” placing it in a “better for you” category within the ranking.

Raising Cane’s Chicken Fingers

Raising Cane’s Chicken Fingers (3 pieces)

Nutrition (per 3 chicken tenders):

• Calories: 390
• Fat: 18 g (Saturated fat: 3 g)
• Sodium: 570 mg
• Carbohydrates: 15 g (fibre: 1 g, sugar: 0 g)
• Protein: 39 g

In the feed content, the Raising Cane’s option is described as higher in calories but with sodium characterized as the lowest on the list. The protein level is also highlighted, alongside low saturated fat and low carbohydrates (as characterized in the feed content).

Zaxby’s Chicken Fingers

Nutrition (per 3 chicken tenders):

• Calories: 300
• Fat: 12 g (Saturated fat: 2 g)
• Sodium: 1230 mg
• Carbohydrates: 13 g (fiber: 1 g, sugar: 0 g
• Protein: 30 g

The feed content describes Zaxby’s as comparatively low in calories and saturated fat, and notes an “excellent protein count.” It also points to sodium content as the factor that “keeps” the chain from ranking higher overall.

Arby’s Chicken Tenders

Arby’s Chicken tenders (3 pieces)

Nutrition (per 3 chicken tenders):

• Calories: 370
• Fat: 3 g (Saturated fat: 0 g)
• Sodium: 1190 mg
• Carbohydrates: 28 g (fibre: 2 g, sugar: 0 g)
• Protein: 23 g

According to the feed content, Arby’s ranks second because, while fat and saturated fat are described as low, sodium is described as “sky-high” and carbohydrates are described as elevated, contributing to the overall ranking.

Popeyes Chicken Tenders

Nutrition (per 3 chicken tenders):

• Calories: 390
• Fat: 19 g (Saturated fat: 9 g)
• Sodium: 1700 mg
• Carbohydrates: 25 g (fibre: 1 g, sugar: 0 g)
• Protein: 35 g

The feed content identifies Popeyes as No. 1 unhealthiest in the ranking. It attributes that placement to the highest saturated fat by a wide margin (9 g, compared with 0–3 g for other brands as described), the highest sodium content (1700 mg), and the highest carb count, which the feed content ties to heavier breading compared with meat.

The analysis and ranking are presented in the feed content by Ali Musa for Wellness Desk – Health & Nutrition Monitoring. Additional sourcing for how the nutrition label inputs were selected or dated is not provided in the feed text.