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
75 kcal
Score
33 / 100
Hurma eriği has a higher nutrition quality score (33) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
47 vs 75(+59.6%)
Score Diff
22 vs 33(+50.0%)
OVERALL WINNER
Hurma eriği
Higher energy
Hurma eriği
Score leader
Hurma eriği
Nutrient split
2 - 13 (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.
Akça armudu and Hurma eriği are compared on a 100 g basis. Check each food record for preparation and portion differences.
Per 100 g, Akça armudu has 47.0 kcal and Hurma eriği has 75.0 kcal. The difference is 28.0 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 22 and 33. These scores are not personal health outcomes or clinical advice.
15 nutrients have measurements for both records. A dash in the table means no measurement is available; it does not mean zero.
| Nutrients | Akça armudu | Hurma eriği | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| A Vitamini (RAE) | — | 81 µg | — |
| B1 Vitamini (Tiamin) | — | 0.03 mg | — |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | — | 0.02 mg | — |
| B6 Vitamini | 0.028 mg | 0.1 mg | +257.1% |
| Bakir | 0.082 mg | 0.11 mg | +34.1% |
| Beta Karoten | 14 µg | 970 µg | +6828.6% |
| C Vitamini (askorbik asit) | 4.3 mg | 15 mg | +248.8% |
| Demir | 0.18 mg | 0.4 mg | +122.2% |
| Diyet lifi | 2.8 g | 3.6 g | +28.6% |
| Enerji (Atwater Genel Faktörleri) | 47 kcal | — | — |
| Folat DFE | — | 8 µg | — |
| Fosfor | 11 mg | 17 mg | +54.5% |
| Fruktoz | 6.2 g | — | — |
| Glikoz | 2.8 g | — | — |
| K Vitamini (filokinon) | 4.4 µg | 2.6 µg | -40.9% |
| Kalsiyum | 9 mg | 15 mg | +66.7% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 12.4 g | 18.6 g | +50.0% |
| Kül | — | 0.5 g | — |
| Lutein + zeaksantin | — | 834 µg | — |
| Magnezyum | 7 mg | 11 mg | +57.1% |
| Malik asit | 250 mg | — | — |
| Mangan | — | 0.35 mg | — |
| Niasin | — | 0.3 mg | — |
| Potasyum | 116 mg | 161 mg | +38.8% |
| Protein | 0.38 g | 0.8 g | +110.5% |
| Sakkaroz | 1.2 g | — | — |
| Sodyum | — | 1 mg | — |
| Su | 85.5 g | 79.5 g | -7.0% |
| Toplam yağ | 0.12 g | 0.2 g | +66.7% |
| Toplam Şeker | — | 12.5 g | — |
| Çinko | — | 0.11 mg | — |
Scientific answers to key differences between Akça armudu and Hurma eriği.
Akça armudu has less energy per 100 g (47 kcal versus 75 kcal).
For measured Beta Karoten, Akça armudu has 14 µg and Hurma eriği has 970 µg 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: Akça armudu 22, Hurma eriği 33.
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.