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
140 kcal
Score
32 / 100
Ahtapot (Izgara) has a higher nutrition quality score (84) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
164 vs 140(-14.6%)
Score Diff
84 vs 32(-61.9%)
OVERALL WINNER
Ahtapot (Izgara)
Higher energy
Ahtapot (Izgara)
Score leader
Ahtapot (Izgara)
Nutrient split
9 - 7 (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.
Ahtapot (Izgara) and Tobiko are compared on a 100 g basis. Check each food record for preparation and portion differences.
Per 100 g, Ahtapot (Izgara) has 164.0 kcal and Tobiko has 140.0 kcal. The difference is 24.0 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 84 and 32. These scores are not personal health outcomes or clinical advice.
16 nutrients have measurements for both records. A dash in the table means no measurement is available; it does not mean zero.
| Nutrients | Ahtapot (Izgara) | Tobiko | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| A Vitamini (RAE) | 90 µg | 91 µg | +1.1% |
| B12 Vitamini | 36 µg | 10 µg | -72.2% |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | — | 0.22 mg | — |
| B6 Vitamini | 0.65 mg | — | — |
| Bakir | 0.74 mg | — | — |
| C Vitamini (askorbik asit) | 8 mg | — | — |
| D Vitamini (IU) | — | 232 iu | — |
| Demir | 9.54 mg | 0.59 mg | -93.8% |
| Diyet lifi | 0 g | — | — |
| E Vitamini (alfa-tokoferol) | 2.1 mg | — | — |
| EPA (20:5 n-3) | — | 0.52 g | — |
| Fosfor | 279 mg | 350 mg | +25.4% |
| Kalsiyum | 106 mg | 41 mg | -61.3% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 4.4 g | 1.5 g | -65.9% |
| Kolesterol | 96 mg | 300 mg | +212.5% |
| Kül | 3.2 g | 4.85 g | +51.6% |
| Magnezyum | 60 mg | 30 mg | -50.0% |
| Niasin | 3.78 mg | — | — |
| Potasyum | 630 mg | 221 mg | -64.9% |
| Protein | 29.82 g | 22.3 g | -25.2% |
| PUFA 22:6 c | — | 0.68 g | — |
| Selenyum | 89.6 µg | 40.2 µg | -55.1% |
| Sodyum | 460 mg | 1500 mg | +226.1% |
| Su | 60.5 g | 64.9 g | +7.3% |
| Toplam doymus yağ asitleri | 0.45 g | — | — |
| Toplam tekli doymamis yağ asitleri | 0.32 g | — | — |
| Toplam yağ | 2.08 g | 6.4 g | +207.7% |
| Toplam çoklu doymamis yağ asitleri | 0.51 g | — | — |
| Çinko | 3.36 mg | 0.95 mg | -71.7% |
Scientific answers to key differences between Ahtapot (Izgara) and Tobiko.
Tobiko has less energy per 100 g (140 kcal versus 164 kcal).
For measured Sodyum, Ahtapot (Izgara) has 460 mg and Tobiko has 1500 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: Ahtapot (Izgara) 84, Tobiko 32.
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.