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
173 kcal
Score
28 / 100
Ançüez sosu has a higher nutrition quality score (28) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
175 vs 173(-1.1%)
Score Diff
27 vs 28(+3.7%)
OVERALL WINNER
Ançüez sosu
Higher energy
Akasya lifi
Score leader
Ançüez sosu
Nutrient split
5 - 8 (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.
Akasya lifi and Ançüez sosu are compared on a 100 g basis. Check each food record for preparation and portion differences.
Per 100 g, Akasya lifi has 175.0 kcal and Ançüez sosu has 173.0 kcal. The difference is 2.0 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 27 and 28. These scores are not personal health outcomes or clinical advice.
13 nutrients have measurements for both records. A dash in the table means no measurement is available; it does not mean zero.
| Nutrients | Akasya lifi | Ançüez sosu | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| A Vitamini (RAE) | — | 45 µg | — |
| B12 Vitamini | — | 8.5 µg | — |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | — | 0.25 mg | — |
| Bakir | 0.15 mg | — | — |
| Demir | 1.2 mg | 3.2 mg | +166.7% |
| DHA (22:6 n-3) | — | 1.15 g | — |
| Diyet lifi | 85 g | 0.2 g | -99.8% |
| Enerji | 732 kj | — | — |
| Enerji (Atwater Genel Faktörleri) | 175 kcal | — | — |
| EPA (20:5 n-3) | — | 0.65 g | — |
| Fosfor | 35 mg | — | — |
| Kalsiyum | 950 mg | 280 mg | -70.5% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 85 g | 1.5 g | -98.2% |
| Kolesterol | — | 85 mg | — |
| Kül | 3.3 g | 19.1 g | +478.8% |
| Magnezyum | 110 mg | 55 mg | -50.0% |
| Mangan | 0.2 mg | — | — |
| Niasin | — | 7.2 mg | — |
| Potasyum | 480 mg | 240 mg | -50.0% |
| Protein | 2.1 g | 15.2 g | +623.8% |
| Selenyum | — | 46.5 µg | — |
| Sodyum | 85 mg | 6800 mg | +7900.0% |
| Su | 9.5 g | 52.4 g | +451.6% |
| Toplam doymus yağ asitleri | 0.02 g | 2.5 g | +12400.0% |
| Toplam yağ | 0.1 g | 11.8 g | +11700.0% |
| Toplam Şeker | 0 g | — | — |
| Çinko | 0.4 mg | 1.8 mg | +350.0% |
| Çözünmeyen lif | 0.5 g | — | — |
| Çözünür lif | 84.5 g | — | — |
Scientific answers to key differences between Akasya lifi and Ançüez sosu.
Ançüez sosu has less energy per 100 g (173 kcal versus 175 kcal).
For measured Toplam doymus yağ asitleri, Akasya lifi has 0.02 g and Ançüez sosu has 2.5 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: Akasya lifi 27, Ançüez sosu 28.
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.