Try real black powder, as others have suggested.
TRULY ANALYZE the average range at which you kill your big game animal(s).
Throw out the longest & shortest distances, before you calculate the average.
If you are killing deer/elk/moose/black bear/feral hogs at any average distance under 150 yards; then the substitute powders have NO REAL WORLD ADVANTAGE over standard Goex black powder, much less the higher quality/higher energy Swiss black powder.
I know this is a hard nut to swallow, but the statistics tell the truth. If you are shooting a modern inline muzzleloading rifle wearing ANY KIND OF MODERN OPTICAL DEVICE, then the scope/red dot optic/holographic optic eliminates ANY ARGUMENT for the substitutes.
Because, the scope can be EASILY ADJUSTED to compensate for the difference between black powder, and ANY OF THE SUBSTITUTES.
Iron, open sights would be a different story. But, THAT'S NOT WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT HERE, IS IT?
Yes, black powder is messier than BH209. But, I would argue that it will force the average muzzleloading shooter to start taking better care of their rifle than ever before.
IMO, BH209 has made a whole generation of muzzleloading shooters lazy as can be due to its virtually non-existent corrosive properties. It corrodes, but so slowly that most shooters can get away with not cleaning their muzzleloading guns just like they do with their centerfire guns.
The truth is that ALL of the subs were designed to compete against real black powder, to mimic the smoke of real black powder, and to provide a higher stored energy per comparable volume measurement, then real black powder.
WITH BULLETS, not patched balls. And bullets don't really come into their own with muzzleloading HUNTERS, not target shooters, until you get past 125-150 yards. Depending upon the caliber of the ball as compared to ANY caliber bullet.