I like both presentations and to me they seem the same in terms of nutritional value, but are there relevant differences between both presentations? Or both are the same from the nutritional point of view.
Thanks
They’re effectively the same in terms of nutritional requirements but here’s the macro splits:
Ready to drink are measured as 35:42:20:3 (carbohydrate, fat, protein, fiber)
Powder based pouches are measured as 37:30:30:3 (carbohydrate, fat, protein, fiber)
I use the powder based ones myself and I usually add oat or almond milk of my choice of flavor (usually vanilla or chocolate) This probably brings my powder closer to the 35:42:20:3 that the ready to drink version has; BUT I haven’t done the math yet to be sure… the amount of almond milk i usually add amounts to about 225 addition calories, whereas the ready to drink version stays at 400 calories per drink.
Both drinks are derived from Oats, peas, rice, coconut, and flaxseed. (plus some vitamins and minerals added in to keep the meal complete)
The ready to drink version includes tapioca starch, while the powder pouch includes sunflower seeds/oils.
Hope it helps 
Yeap there are differences in terms of the macronutrient split as highlighted by Sean.
Both products are nutritionally complete at a 2000kcal intake i.e at least 100% of the DV of the 27 essential vitamins and minerals are met plus adequate protein, fiber and fats.
More people have the powders 100% (although this still a minority of our customers) than RTD because of the higher protein content and lower price per meal.
In my humble opinion, there is no significant difference in overall nutritional content between powder and RTD, if both are being compared at 400 calories each. The minor difference in fat and protein ratios won’t make a meaningful difference. The core ingredients are the same.