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
46 kcal
Score
35 / 100
Can eriği has a higher nutrition quality score (35) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
57 vs 46(-19.3%)
Score Diff
19 vs 35(+84.2%)
OVERALL WINNER
Can eriği
Higher energy
Akça armut
Score leader
Can eriği
Nutrient split
5 - 9 (tie: 5)
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 armut and Can eriği are compared on a 100 g basis. Check each food record for preparation and portion differences.
Per 100 g, Akça armut has 57.0 kcal and Can eriği has 46.0 kcal. The difference is 11.0 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 19 and 35. These scores are not personal health outcomes or clinical advice.
19 nutrients have measurements for both records. A dash in the table means no measurement is available; it does not mean zero.
| Nutrients | Akça armut | Can eriği | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| A Vitamini (RAE) | — | 17 µg | — |
| B1 Vitamini (Tiamin) | 0.012 mg | 0.028 mg | +133.3% |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | 0.026 mg | 0.026 mg | 0.0% |
| B6 Vitamini | 0.029 mg | 0.029 mg | 0.0% |
| Bakir | — | 0.057 mg | — |
| Beta Karoten | — | 190 µg | — |
| C Vitamini (askorbik asit) | 4.3 mg | 9.5 mg | +120.9% |
| Demir | 0.18 mg | 0.17 mg | -5.6% |
| Diyet lifi | 3.1 g | 1.5 g | -51.6% |
| Folat DFE | 7 µg | — | — |
| Fosfor | 12 mg | 16 mg | +33.3% |
| Fruktoz | 6.22 g | — | — |
| Glikoz | 2.76 g | — | — |
| K Vitamini (filokinon) | 4.4 µg | 6.4 µg | +45.5% |
| Kalsiyum | 9 mg | 6 mg | -33.3% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 15.2 g | 10.2 g | -32.9% |
| Kül | — | 0.45 g | — |
| Magnezyum | 7 mg | 7 mg | 0.0% |
| Niasin | 0.161 mg | 0.42 mg | +160.9% |
| Potasyum | 116 mg | 157 mg | +35.3% |
| Protein | 0.36 g | 0.7 g | +94.4% |
| Sakkaroz | 0.77 g | — | — |
| Sodyum | 1 mg | 1 mg | 0.0% |
| Su | 83.8 g | 88.5 g | +5.6% |
| Toplam Folat | — | 5 µg | — |
| Toplam yağ | 0.14 g | 0.28 g | +100.0% |
| Toplam Şeker | 9.75 g | 8.2 g | -15.9% |
| Çinko | 0.1 mg | 0.1 mg | 0.0% |
Scientific answers to key differences between Akça armut and Can eriği.
Can eriği has less energy per 100 g (46 kcal versus 57 kcal).
For measured Niasin, Akça armut has 0.161 mg and Can eriği has 0.42 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: Akça armut 19, Can eriği 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.