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.
Energy
68 kcal
Score
49 / 100
Share your experiences or ask your questions.
Agave, Çiğ (Güneybatı) has a higher nutrition quality score (49) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
68 vs 153(+125.0%)
Score Diff
49 vs 35(-28.6%)
OVERALL WINNER
Agave, Çiğ (Güneybatı)
Higher energy
Tamal (Navajo)
Score leader
Agave, Çiğ (Güneybatı)
Nutrient split
14 - 40 (tie: 10)
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.
Agave, Çiğ (Güneybatı) and Tamal (Navajo) are compared on a 100 g basis. Check each food record for preparation and portion differences.
Per 100 g, Agave, Çiğ (Güneybatı) has 68.0 kcal and Tamal (Navajo) has 153.0 kcal. The difference is 85.0 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 49 and 35. These scores are not personal health outcomes or clinical advice.
64 nutrients have measurements for both records. A dash in the table means no measurement is available; it does not mean zero.
| Nutrients | Agave, Çiğ (Güneybatı) | Tamal (Navajo) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| A Vitamini (IU) | 37 iu | 0 iu | -100.0% |
| A Vitamini (RAE) | 2 µg | 0 µg | -100.0% |
| ALA (18:3 n-3) | — | 0.03 g | — |
| Alanin | 0.02 g | 0.42 g | +2000.0% |
| Alfa Karoten | 0 µg | — | — |
| Alfa tokotrienol | 0 mg | 0 mg | — |
| Arjinin | 0.11 g | 0.39 g | +254.5% |
| Aspartik asit | 0.04 g | 0.56 g | +1300.0% |
| B1 Vitamini (Tiamin) | 0.03 mg | 0.05 mg | +66.7% |
| B12 Vitamini | 0 µg | 0.54 µg | — |
| B12 Vitamini (eklenmiş) | 0 µg | — | — |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | 0.04 mg | 0.08 mg | +100.0% |
| B6 Vitamini | 0.06 mg | 0.14 mg | +133.3% |
| Bakir | 0.14 mg | 0.06 mg | -57.1% |
| Besin folati | 7 µg | 15 µg | +114.3% |
| Beta Karoten | 22 µg | — | — |
| Beta kriptoksantin | 0 µg | — | — |
| Beta tokoferol | 0 mg | 0 mg | — |
| Beta tokotrienol | 0 mg | 0 mg | — |
| C Vitamini (askorbik asit) | 4 mg | 1.7 mg | -57.5% |
| D Vitamini | 0 µg | — | — |
| D Vitamini (IU) | 0 iu | — | — |
| Delta tokoferol | 0 mg | 0 mg | — |
| Delta tokotrienol | 0 mg | 0 mg | — |
| Demir | 1.8 mg | 1.22 mg | -32.2% |
| Diyet lifi | 6.6 g | 3.1 g | -53.0% |
| E Vitamini (alfa-tokoferol) | 0.23 mg | 0 mg | -100.0% |
| E Vitamini (eklenmiş) | 0 mg | — | — |
| Enerji | 68 kj | 153 kj | +125.0% |
| Etil alkol | 0 g | — | — |
| Fenilalanin | 0.02 g | 0.28 g | +1300.0% |
| Folat DFE | 7 µg | — | — |
| Folik asit | 0 µg | — | — |
| Fosfor | 7 mg | 99 mg | +1314.3% |
| Fruktoz | 0.98 g | 0.17 g | -82.7% |
| Galaktoz | 0 g | 0 g | — |
| Gama tokoferol | 0 mg | 0 mg | — |
| Gama tokotrienol | 0 mg | 0 mg | — |
| Glikoz | 1.19 g | 0.21 g | -82.4% |
| Glisin | 0.02 g | 0.38 g | +1800.0% |
| Glutamik asit | 0.05 g | 1.03 g | +1960.0% |
| Histidin | 0.01 g | 0.2 g | +1900.0% |
| Izolosin | 0.01 g | 0.27 g | +2600.0% |
| K Vitamini (dihidrofilokinon) | 0 µg | — | — |
| K Vitamini (filokinon) | 5.3 µg | — | — |
| Kafein | 0 mg | — | — |
| Kalsiyum | 417 mg | 29 mg | -93.0% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 16.23 g | 18.12 g | +11.6% |
| Kolesterol | 0 mg | 17 mg | — |
| Kül | 1.27 g | 1.37 g | +7.9% |
| Laktoz | 0 g | 0 g | — |
| Likopen | 0 µg | — | — |
| Lizin | 0.03 g | 0.43 g | +1333.3% |
| Losin | 0.03 g | 0.57 g | +1800.0% |
| Magnezyum | 55 mg | 22 mg | -60.0% |
| Maltoz | 0 g | 0.22 g | — |
| Mangan | 0.09 mg | 0.17 mg | +88.9% |
| Metiyonin | 0.01 g | 0.15 g | +1400.0% |
| MUFA 14:1 | — | 0.04 g | — |
| MUFA 15:1 | — | 0 g | — |
| MUFA 16:1 | — | 0.19 g | — |
| MUFA 17:1 | — | 0.05 g | — |
| MUFA 18:1 (oleik asit) | — | 2.44 g | — |
| MUFA 20:1 | — | 0.03 g | — |
| Niasin | 0.16 mg | 1.59 mg | +893.8% |
| Nisasta | 0.24 g | 12.27 g | +5012.5% |
| Pantotenik asit | 0.04 mg | 0.2 mg | +400.0% |
| Potasyum | 127 mg | 131 mg | +3.1% |
| Prolin | 0.01 g | 0.38 g | +3700.0% |
| Protein | 0.52 g | 6.28 g | +1107.7% |
| PUFA 18:2 (linoleik asit) | — | 0.65 g | — |
| PUFA 18:3 | — | 0.03 g | — |
| PUFA 18:3 n-6 | — | 0 g | — |
| PUFA 20:2 n-6 | — | 0 g | — |
| PUFA 20:3 | — | 0 g | — |
| PUFA 20:4 (arasidonik asit) | — | 0.01 g | — |
| Retinol | 0 µg | 0 µg | — |
| Sakkaroz | 0.41 g | 0.4 g | -2.4% |
| Selenyum | 0.4 µg | 6 µg | +1400.0% |
| Serin | 0.02 g | 0.27 g | +1250.0% |
| SFA 10:0 | — | 0 g | — |
| SFA 12:0 | — | 0 g | — |
| SFA 14:0 | — | 0.17 g | — |
| SFA 15:0 | — | 0.02 g | — |
| SFA 16:0 (palmitik asit) | — | 1.4 g | — |
| SFA 17:0 | — | 0.06 g | — |
| SFA 18:0 (stearik asit) | — | 0.74 g | — |
| SFA 20:0 | — | 0.01 g | — |
| SFA 22:0 | — | 0 g | — |
| SFA 8:0 | — | 0 g | — |
| Sistin | 0.01 g | 0.08 g | +700.0% |
| Sodyum | 14 mg | 427 mg | +2950.0% |
| Su | 81.83 g | 68.1 g | -16.8% |
| Teobromin | 0 mg | — | — |
| Tirozin | 0.01 g | 0.2 g | +1900.0% |
| Toplam doymus yağ asitleri | — | 2.4 g | — |
| Toplam Folat | 7 µg | 15 µg | +114.3% |
| Toplam tekli doymamis yağ asitleri | — | 2.74 g | — |
| Toplam yağ | 0.15 g | 6.12 g | +3980.0% |
| Toplam çoklu doymamis yağ asitleri | — | 0.69 g | — |
| Toplam Şeker | 2.58 g | 0.99 g | -61.6% |
| Treonin | 0.01 g | 0.24 g | +2300.0% |
| Triptofan | 0.01 g | 0.05 g | +400.0% |
| Valin | 0.02 g | 0.32 g | +1500.0% |
| Çinko | 0.15 mg | 1.48 mg | +886.7% |
Scientific answers to key differences between Agave, Çiğ (Güneybatı) and Tamal (Navajo).
Agave, Çiğ (Güneybatı) has less energy per 100 g (68 kcal versus 153 kcal).
For measured Nisasta, Agave, Çiğ (Güneybatı) has 0.24 g and Tamal (Navajo) has 12.27 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: Agave, Çiğ (Güneybatı) 49, Tamal (Navajo) 35.
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.