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
132 kcal
Score
35 / 100
Ali Nazik Kebabı has a higher nutrition quality score (43) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
151.5 vs 132(-12.9%)
Score Diff
43 vs 35(-18.6%)
OVERALL WINNER
Ali Nazik Kebabı
Higher energy
Ali Nazik Kebabı
Score leader
Ali Nazik Kebabı
Nutrient split
11 - 2 (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.
Ali Nazik Kebabı and Yuvalama Çorbası are compared on a 100 g basis. Check each food record for preparation and portion differences.
Per 100 g, Ali Nazik Kebabı has 151.5 kcal and Yuvalama Çorbası has 132.0 kcal. The difference is 19.5 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 43 and 35. These scores are not personal health outcomes or clinical advice.
18 nutrients have measurements for both records. A dash in the table means no measurement is available; it does not mean zero.
| Nutrients | Ali Nazik Kebabı | Yuvalama Çorbası | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| A Vitamini (RAE) | 26 µg | — | — |
| B1 Vitamini (Tiamin) | — | 0.08 mg | — |
| B12 Vitamini | 0.75 µg | 0.45 µg | -40.0% |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | 0.14 mg | 0.14 mg | 0.0% |
| B6 Vitamini | — | 0.12 mg | — |
| C Vitamini (askorbik asit) | 4.2 mg | — | — |
| Demir | 1.15 mg | 1.15 mg | 0.0% |
| Diyet lifi | 1.7 g | 1.4 g | -17.6% |
| Enerji | — | 552 kj | — |
| Enerji (Atwater Genel Faktörleri) | — | 132 kcal | — |
| Fosfor | 112 mg | 94 mg | -16.1% |
| Kalsiyum | 68 mg | 68 mg | 0.0% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 5.7 g | 11.2 g | +96.5% |
| Kolesterol | 28 mg | 18.5 mg | -33.9% |
| Kül | — | 1 g | — |
| Magnezyum | 19 mg | 19 mg | 0.0% |
| Niasin | 2.2 mg | 1.65 mg | -25.0% |
| Potasyum | 275 mg | 165 mg | -40.0% |
| Protein | 8.4 g | 6.8 g | -19.0% |
| Selenyum | — | 6.8 µg | — |
| Sodyum | 345 mg | 245 mg | -29.0% |
| Su | 74.2 g | 75.8 g | +2.2% |
| Toplam doymus yağ asitleri | 4.1 g | 2.85 g | -30.5% |
| Toplam Folat | — | 24 µg | — |
| Toplam tekli doymamis yağ asitleri | — | 2.3 g | — |
| Toplam yağ | 10.2 g | 6.2 g | -39.2% |
| Toplam çoklu doymamis yağ asitleri | — | 0.55 g | — |
| Toplam Şeker | 2.5 g | 1.6 g | -36.0% |
| Çinko | 1.35 mg | 1.35 mg | 0.0% |
Scientific answers to key differences between Ali Nazik Kebabı and Yuvalama Çorbası.
Yuvalama Çorbası has less energy per 100 g (132 kcal versus 151.5 kcal).
For measured Karbonhidrat (farkla), Ali Nazik Kebabı has 5.7 g and Yuvalama Çorbası has 11.2 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: Ali Nazik Kebabı 43, Yuvalama Çorbası 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.