I seem to notice a lot of people with a strong preference one way or another, for whatever reason, about buying online or buying from stores. Unfortunately, other than sticking with name-brands like "Depends" or "Goodnites" it's pretty hard to make an informed decision about which type of diaper to buy. Buy the wrong one, and your out $10-20, and depending on your living arrangements also your best chance to buy diapers. So, in order to help you make a more informed decision, I decided to try and review some of the brands that commonly appear in stores. This particular review is about the generic store brand Nite Pants from Kroger, which seem to be identical to the CVS Sleep Comforts, but generic store brands are not all the same (Walgreens, for example, is significantly different).
These white pull-on style diapers remind me of the older late-90's plain white goodnites, and I don't say that lightly. I've seen a lot of comparisons to Goodnites with things like Walgreens Sleep Pants, and in the sense that they are white and used for children who wet the bed, I guess that's true, but (sparing my memory from that long ago) for better or worse it looks like they ripped off the old Goodnites design. Obviously these are white, so the cuteness factor is not applicable. There is a label in the back that is a little more purple than red I seem to remember in Goodnites, and they feel a bit more like paper, but if you're looking for that trip down memory lane without finding (and sinking a small fortune in) the rare vintage Goodnites, this might be what you need. Folded up, they feel thicker than Goodnites, but when wearing them they feel a little thinner; I attribute this to their sturdier sides.
I'm reviewing the L/XL size, and they are gender-neutral. Expect around the same fit as modern Goodnites, but a little bit smaller and maybe a little tighter but more constrained front-to-back than waist-size. If you fit into one you will probably fit into the other. They're pull-ups style briefs without tear-away sides, so if you get them to fit you're not going to have to worry about them ripping off within an hour (Underjams, Walgreens Nite Pants, etc). Unlike Goodnites, their sides seem a bit stronger and they will retain about the same elasticity over the same length of time a Goodnite will wear out.
In terms of wicking and leak guards, these are some of the better diapers out there, but in terms of capacity they are maybe 1/2 to 1/3 the capacity of a Goodnite. If you flood them without reaching capacity then they will feel dry almost instantly, although they will appear noticeably wet/discolored from the outside (I'm not taking a picture of that). They will usually handle that one wetting better than a Goodnite, but then not handle anything else, while the Goodnite (if done more slowly) will hold more. From a practical standpoint, I could definitely see these being used for their intended purpose, and holding up fairly well, but the kind of long-term or heavy wear one might expect out of something like Abena/Bambino is pretty well out of the question.
These are probably best for someone who misses the plain white vintage Goodnites (although if you live near Mexico...), and are a fairly practical product for their intended purpose. They can serve as a good alternative if you can't get Goodnites for some reason, or if you want plain white instead of colorful designs that have become normative for Goodnites/Underjams. If you aren't looking for one of those reasons, or you're looking for high capacity, you can probably do better for the price. However, Sleep Comforts / Nite Pants are pretty readily available, discreet, and plain, and they aren't complete garbage.
In terms of price, they cost a little more than Goodnites, but not by a whole lot; $9 for 12 pack of Nite Pants versus $20 for 28 pack of Goodnites, which reduces to $0.75/pant Kroger vs. $0.71/pant Goodnites. I'd recommend getting them from Kroger, since they won't be marked up like at CVS (they were $10, but I've seen pharmacies differ by an order of up to $2 for the same product).