Compare two different foods side-by-side by nutrients, energy, and quality scores.
The CSV contains energy and nutrients per 100 g for these two records only. Missing measurements remain blank rather than zero. Model scores and personal health conclusions are not exported.
Share your experiences or ask your questions.
Energy
47 kcal
Score
36 / 100
Acai Berry has a higher nutrition quality score (40) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
70 vs 47(-32.9%)
Score Diff
40 vs 36(-10.0%)
OVERALL WINNER
Acai Berry
Higher energy
Acai Berry
Score leader
Acai Berry
Nutrient split
11 - 6 (tie: 0)
This chart shows energy per 100 g for both foods.
Each axis is normalized to 0-100; the outer shape indicates relative dominance on that nutrient.
Green/blue bars indicate first food advantage, orange bars indicate second food advantage.
Acai Berry and Portakal (Washington) are compared on a 100 g basis. Check each food record for preparation and portion differences.
Per 100 g, Acai Berry has 70.0 kcal and Portakal (Washington) has 47.0 kcal. The difference is 23.0 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 40 and 36. These scores are not personal health outcomes or clinical advice.
17 nutrients have measurements for both records. A dash in the table means no measurement is available; it does not mean zero.
| Nutrients | Acai Berry | Portakal (Washington) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| A Vitamini (RAE) | 65 µg | 11 µg | -83.1% |
| B1 Vitamini (Tiamin) | — | 0.087 mg | — |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | — | 0.04 mg | — |
| B6 Vitamini | — | 0.06 mg | — |
| Bakir | 0.15 mg | 0.045 mg | -70.0% |
| Beta Karoten | — | 71 µg | — |
| Beta kriptoksantin | — | 116 µg | — |
| C Vitamini (askorbik asit) | 9 mg | 53.2 mg | +491.1% |
| Demir | 1.2 mg | 0.1 mg | -91.7% |
| Diyet lifi | 3.5 g | 2.4 g | -31.4% |
| E Vitamini (alfa-tokoferol) | 1.5 mg | 0.18 mg | -88.0% |
| Fosfor | — | 14 mg | — |
| Kalsiyum | 35 mg | 40 mg | +14.3% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 4 g | 11.75 g | +193.8% |
| Kül | 0.8 g | 0.44 g | -45.0% |
| Magnezyum | 20 mg | 10 mg | -50.0% |
| MUFA 18:1 (oleik asit) | 2.7 g | — | — |
| Niasin | — | 0.282 mg | — |
| Potasyum | 130 mg | 181 mg | +39.2% |
| Protein | 1.2 g | 0.94 g | -21.7% |
| PUFA 18:2 (linoleik asit) | 0.5 g | — | — |
| Sodyum | 7 mg | 0 mg | -100.0% |
| Su | 85 g | 86.75 g | +2.1% |
| Toplam doymus yağ asitleri | 1.3 g | — | — |
| Toplam Folat | — | 30 µg | — |
| Toplam tekli doymamis yağ asitleri | 2.8 g | — | — |
| Toplam yağ | 5 g | 0.12 g | -97.6% |
| Toplam çoklu doymamis yağ asitleri | 0.6 g | — | — |
| Toplam Şeker | 0.5 g | 9.35 g | +1770.0% |
| Çinko | 0.3 mg | 0.07 mg | -76.7% |
Scientific answers to key differences between Acai Berry and Portakal (Washington).
Portakal (Washington) has less energy per 100 g (47 kcal versus 70 kcal).
For measured Toplam Şeker, Acai Berry has 0.5 g and Portakal (Washington) has 9.35 g per 100 g. The table shows other nutrients separately.
The score summarizes this site's nutrient model. It does not establish that one food is healthier or suitable for everyone. Scores: Acai Berry 40, Portakal (Washington) 36.
Energy and nutrient values in the table are per 100 g. Actual intake changes with serving size.
Data Sources
Records may come from different sources. Check each food page for source and preparation details; do not treat missing measurements as zero.
Analytical Methodology
The scoring algorithm is a scale of 100 based on nutrient density and macro/micro component balance.