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
215 kcal
Score
8 / 100
Adana kebabı has a higher nutrition quality score (42) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
268.8 vs 215(-20.0%)
Score Diff
42 vs 8(-81.0%)
OVERALL WINNER
Adana kebabı
Higher energy
Adana kebabı
Score leader
Adana kebabı
Nutrient split
13 - 4 (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.
Adana kebabı and İç pilav are compared on a 100 g basis. Check each food record for preparation and portion differences.
Per 100 g, Adana kebabı has 268.8 kcal and İç pilav has 215.0 kcal. The difference is 53.8 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 42 and 8. 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 | Adana kebabı | İç pilav | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| A Vitamini (RAE) | 28 µg | 25 µg | -10.7% |
| B1 Vitamini (Tiamin) | — | 0.06 mg | — |
| B12 Vitamini | 2.1 µg | — | — |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | — | 0.03 mg | — |
| B6 Vitamini | 0.32 mg | — | — |
| C Vitamini (askorbik asit) | 4.2 mg | 1.2 mg | -71.4% |
| Demir | 1.9 mg | 0.8 mg | -57.9% |
| Diyet lifi | 0.4 g | 1.5 g | +275.0% |
| E Vitamini (alfa-tokoferol) | — | 0.9 mg | — |
| Enerji | — | 900 kj | — |
| Fosfor | 165 mg | 65 mg | -60.6% |
| Kalsiyum | 16 mg | 18 mg | +12.5% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 1.2 g | 30.5 g | +2441.7% |
| Kolesterol | 75 mg | — | — |
| Kül | 1.9 g | — | — |
| Magnezyum | 18 mg | 16 mg | -11.1% |
| Niasin | 4.8 mg | 0.8 mg | -83.3% |
| Potasyum | 265 mg | 110 mg | -58.5% |
| Protein | 16.5 g | 3.8 g | -77.0% |
| Sodyum | 460 mg | 280 mg | -39.1% |
| Su | 55.4 g | 55 g | -0.7% |
| Toplam doymus yağ asitleri | 10.2 g | 2.8 g | -72.5% |
| Toplam tekli doymamis yağ asitleri | 9.1 g | — | — |
| Toplam yağ | 22 g | 8.5 g | -61.4% |
| Toplam çoklu doymamis yağ asitleri | 1.1 g | — | — |
| Toplam Şeker | 0.6 g | 2.2 g | +266.7% |
| Çinko | 3.6 mg | 0.6 mg | -83.3% |
Scientific answers to key differences between Adana kebabı and İç pilav.
İç pilav has less energy per 100 g (215 kcal versus 268.8 kcal).
For measured Karbonhidrat (farkla), Adana kebabı has 1.2 g and İç pilav has 30.5 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: Adana kebabı 42, İç pilav 8.
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.