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
388 kcal
Score
57 / 100
Çörek Otu Tohumu has a higher nutrition quality score (57) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
691 vs 388(-43.9%)
Score Diff
14 vs 57(+307.1%)
OVERALL WINNER
Çörek Otu Tohumu
Higher energy
Amerikan cevizi
Score leader
Çörek Otu Tohumu
Nutrient split
6 - 14 (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.
Amerikan cevizi and Çörek Otu Tohumu are compared on a 100 g basis. Check each food record for preparation and portion differences.
Per 100 g, Amerikan cevizi has 691.0 kcal and Çörek Otu Tohumu has 388.0 kcal. The difference is 303.0 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 14 and 57. These scores are not personal health outcomes or clinical advice.
20 nutrients have measurements for both records. A dash in the table means no measurement is available; it does not mean zero.
| Nutrients | Amerikan cevizi | Çörek Otu Tohumu | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| B1 Vitamini (Tiamin) | 0.66 mg | 0.35 mg | -47.0% |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | 0.13 mg | 0.22 mg | +69.2% |
| B6 Vitamini | 0.21 mg | 0.52 mg | +147.6% |
| Bakir | — | 1.2 mg | — |
| C Vitamini (askorbik asit) | 1.1 mg | — | — |
| Demir | 2.53 mg | 14.5 mg | +473.1% |
| Diyet lifi | 9.6 g | 26.5 g | +176.0% |
| Enerji | — | 1623 kj | — |
| Enerji (Atwater Genel Faktörleri) | — | 388 kcal | — |
| Fosfor | 277 mg | 540 mg | +94.9% |
| Kalsiyum | 70 mg | 570 mg | +714.3% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 13.86 g | 41.5 g | +199.4% |
| Kül | — | 4.8 g | — |
| Magnezyum | 121 mg | 265 mg | +119.0% |
| Mangan | — | 3.2 mg | — |
| MUFA 18:1 (oleik asit) | — | 6.5 g | — |
| Niasin | 1.17 mg | 5.7 mg | +387.2% |
| Potasyum | 410 mg | 810 mg | +97.6% |
| Protein | 9.17 g | 17.8 g | +94.1% |
| PUFA 18:2 (linoleik asit) | — | 15.6 g | — |
| Sodyum | — | 22 mg | — |
| Su | 3.52 g | 7.4 g | +110.2% |
| Toplam doymus yağ asitleri | 6.18 g | 4.5 g | -27.2% |
| Toplam Folat | 22 µg | 62 µg | +181.8% |
| Toplam tekli doymamis yağ asitleri | 40.8 g | 6.8 g | -83.3% |
| Toplam yağ | 71.97 g | 28.5 g | -60.4% |
| Toplam çoklu doymamis yağ asitleri | 21.6 g | 16.2 g | -25.0% |
| Toplam Şeker | 3.97 g | 2.3 g | -42.1% |
| Çinko | 4.53 mg | 5.1 mg | +12.6% |
Scientific answers to key differences between Amerikan cevizi and Çörek Otu Tohumu.
Çörek Otu Tohumu has less energy per 100 g (388 kcal versus 691 kcal).
For measured Kalsiyum, Amerikan cevizi has 70 mg and Çörek Otu Tohumu has 570 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: Amerikan cevizi 14, Çörek Otu Tohumu 57.
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.