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
19 kcal
Score
94 / 100
Gökkuşağı pazı has a higher nutrition quality score (94) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
15 vs 19(+26.7%)
Score Diff
85 vs 94(+10.6%)
OVERALL WINNER
Gökkuşağı pazı
Higher energy
Gökkuşağı pazı
Score leader
Gökkuşağı pazı
Nutrient split
2 - 21 (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 pazı 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 pazı has 19.0 kcal. The difference is 4.0 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 85 and 94. These scores are not personal health outcomes or clinical advice.
23 nutrients have measurements for both records. A dash in the table means no measurement is available; it does not mean zero.
| Nutrients | Acur | Gökkuşağı pazı | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| A Vitamini (RAE) | — | 306 µg | — |
| B1 Vitamini (Tiamin) | 0.027 mg | 0.04 mg | +48.1% |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | 0.033 mg | 0.09 mg | +172.7% |
| B6 Vitamini | 0.04 mg | 0.099 mg | +147.5% |
| Bakir | 0.041 mg | 0.179 mg | +336.6% |
| Beta Karoten | 45 µg | 3647 µg | +8004.4% |
| C Vitamini (askorbik asit) | 2.8 mg | 30 mg | +971.4% |
| Demir | 0.28 mg | 1.8 mg | +542.9% |
| Diyet lifi | 0.5 g | 1.6 g | +220.0% |
| E Vitamini (alfa-tokoferol) | — | 1.89 mg | — |
| Folat DFE | 7 µg | 14 µg | +100.0% |
| Fosfor | 24 mg | 46 mg | +91.7% |
| K Vitamini (filokinon) | 16.4 µg | 830 µg | +4961.0% |
| Kalsiyum | 16 mg | 51 mg | +218.8% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 3.63 g | 3.74 g | +3.0% |
| Lutein + zeaksantin | — | 11000 µg | — |
| Magnezyum | 13 mg | 81 mg | +523.1% |
| Mangan | 0.079 mg | 0.366 mg | +363.3% |
| Niasin | 0.098 mg | 0.4 mg | +308.2% |
| Potasyum | 147 mg | 379 mg | +157.8% |
| Protein | 0.65 g | 1.8 g | +176.9% |
| Sodyum | 2 mg | 213 mg | +10550.0% |
| Su | 95.23 g | 92.66 g | -2.7% |
| Toplam yağ | 0.11 g | 0.2 g | +81.8% |
| Toplam Şeker | 1.67 g | 1.1 g | -34.1% |
| Çinko | 0.2 mg | 0.36 mg | +80.0% |
Scientific answers to key differences between Acur and Gökkuşağı pazı.
Acur has less energy per 100 g (15 kcal versus 19 kcal).
For measured Sodyum, Acur has 2 mg and Gökkuşağı pazı has 213 mg 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 pazı 94.
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.