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
41 kcal
Score
44 / 100
Acur has a higher nutrition quality score (85) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
15 vs 41(+173.3%)
Score Diff
85 vs 44(-48.2%)
OVERALL WINNER
Acur
Higher energy
Gökkuşağı havuç
Score leader
Acur
Nutrient split
3 - 16 (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.
Acur and Gökkuşağı havuç are compared on a 100 g basis. Check each food record for preparation and portion differences.
Per 100 g, Acur has 15.0 kcal and Gökkuşağı havuç has 41.0 kcal. The difference is 26.0 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 85 and 44. These scores are not personal health outcomes or clinical advice.
19 nutrients have measurements for both records. A dash in the table means no measurement is available; it does not mean zero.
| Nutrients | Acur | Gökkuşağı havuç | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| A Vitamini (RAE) | — | 835 µg | — |
| B1 Vitamini (Tiamin) | 0.027 mg | 0.066 mg | +144.4% |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | 0.033 mg | 0.058 mg | +75.8% |
| B6 Vitamini | 0.04 mg | 0.138 mg | +245.0% |
| Bakir | 0.041 mg | — | — |
| Beta Karoten | 45 µg | 8285 µg | +18311.1% |
| C Vitamini (askorbik asit) | 2.8 mg | 5.9 mg | +110.7% |
| Demir | 0.28 mg | 0.3 mg | +7.1% |
| Diyet lifi | 0.5 g | 2.8 g | +460.0% |
| Enerji (Atwater Genel Faktörleri) | — | 41 kcal | — |
| Folat DFE | 7 µg | — | — |
| Fosfor | 24 mg | 35 mg | +45.8% |
| K Vitamini (filokinon) | 16.4 µg | 13.2 µg | -19.5% |
| Kalsiyum | 16 mg | 33 mg | +106.3% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 3.63 g | 9.58 g | +163.9% |
| Magnezyum | 13 mg | 12 mg | -7.7% |
| Mangan | 0.079 mg | — | — |
| Niasin | 0.098 mg | 0.983 mg | +903.1% |
| Potasyum | 147 mg | 320 mg | +117.7% |
| Protein | 0.65 g | 0.93 g | +43.1% |
| Sodyum | 2 mg | 69 mg | +3350.0% |
| Su | 95.23 g | 88.29 g | -7.3% |
| Toplam Folat | — | 19 µg | — |
| Toplam yağ | 0.11 g | 0.24 g | +118.2% |
| Toplam Şeker | 1.67 g | 4.74 g | +183.8% |
| Çinko | 0.2 mg | — | — |
Scientific answers to key differences between Acur and Gökkuşağı havuç.
Acur has less energy per 100 g (15 kcal versus 41 kcal).
For measured Beta Karoten, Acur has 45 µg and Gökkuşağı havuç has 8285 µg 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: Acur 85, Gökkuşağı havuç 44.
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.