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
151.8 kcal
Score
41 / 100
Temakizushi has a higher nutrition quality score (41) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
148 vs 151.8(+2.6%)
Score Diff
20 vs 41(+105.0%)
OVERALL WINNER
Temakizushi
Higher energy
Temakizushi
Score leader
Temakizushi
Nutrient split
12 - 3 (tie: 1)
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.
Aleesa and Temakizushi are compared on a 100 g basis. Check each food record for preparation and portion differences.
Per 100 g, Aleesa has 148.0 kcal and Temakizushi has 151.8 kcal. The difference is 3.8 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 20 and 41. 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 | Aleesa | Temakizushi | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| A Vitamini (RAE) | — | 35 µg | — |
| B1 Vitamini (Tiamin) | 0.12 mg | — | — |
| B12 Vitamini | — | 1.1 µg | — |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | 0.08 mg | — | — |
| B6 Vitamini | 0.14 mg | — | — |
| D Vitamini | — | 1.5 µg | — |
| Demir | 1.2 mg | 0.85 mg | -29.2% |
| Diyet lifi | 2.1 g | 1.4 g | -33.3% |
| Enerji (Atwater Genel Faktörleri) | 148 kcal | — | — |
| Fosfor | 115 mg | 85 mg | -26.1% |
| İyot | — | 68 µg | — |
| Kalsiyum | 24 mg | 18 mg | -25.0% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 18.5 g | 25.4 g | +37.3% |
| Kolesterol | 18 mg | 14 mg | -22.2% |
| Kül | 1.2 g | — | — |
| Magnezyum | 34 mg | 22 mg | -35.3% |
| Niasin | 2.3 mg | — | — |
| Potasyum | 185 mg | 185 mg | 0.0% |
| Protein | 8.5 g | 6.2 g | -27.1% |
| Selenyum | — | 12.4 µg | — |
| Sodyum | 275 mg | 340 mg | +23.6% |
| Su | 68.2 g | 63.5 g | -6.9% |
| Toplam doymus yağ asitleri | 1.4 g | 0.6 g | -57.1% |
| Toplam Folat | — | 28 µg | — |
| Toplam tekli doymamis yağ asitleri | 1.5 g | 0.9 g | -40.0% |
| Toplam yağ | 4.2 g | 2.8 g | -33.3% |
| Toplam çoklu doymamis yağ asitleri | — | 1.1 g | — |
| Toplam Şeker | 0.4 g | 2.8 g | +600.0% |
| Çinko | 1.1 mg | 0.72 mg | -34.5% |
Scientific answers to key differences between Aleesa and Temakizushi.
Aleesa has less energy per 100 g (148 kcal versus 151.8 kcal).
For measured Toplam Şeker, Aleesa has 0.4 g and Temakizushi has 2.8 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: Aleesa 20, Temakizushi 41.
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.