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
268 kcal
Score
9 / 100
Amritsari kulcha has a higher nutrition quality score (14) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
275 vs 268(-2.5%)
Score Diff
14 vs 9(-35.7%)
OVERALL WINNER
Amritsari kulcha
Higher energy
Amritsari kulcha
Score leader
Amritsari kulcha
Nutrient split
13 - 4 (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.
Amritsari kulcha and Biko are compared on a 100 g basis. Check each food record for preparation and portion differences.
Per 100 g, Amritsari kulcha has 275.0 kcal and Biko has 268.0 kcal. The difference is 7.0 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 14 and 9. 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 | Amritsari kulcha | Biko | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| A Vitamini (RAE) | 35 µg | — | — |
| B1 Vitamini (Tiamin) | 0.22 mg | 0.05 mg | -77.3% |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | 0.15 mg | 0.04 mg | -73.3% |
| B6 Vitamini | 0.18 mg | — | — |
| C Vitamini (askorbik asit) | 6.5 mg | — | — |
| Demir | 2.1 mg | 1.15 mg | -45.2% |
| Diyet lifi | 2.8 g | 1.4 g | -50.0% |
| Folat DFE | 45 µg | — | — |
| Fosfor | 110 mg | 64 mg | -41.8% |
| Kalsiyum | 45 mg | 24 mg | -46.7% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 38.5 g | 44.8 g | +16.4% |
| Kül | 1.5 g | 0.8 g | -46.7% |
| Magnezyum | 28 mg | 28 mg | 0.0% |
| Mangan | — | 0.54 mg | — |
| Niasin | 2.1 mg | 1.05 mg | -50.0% |
| Potasyum | 210 mg | 165 mg | -21.4% |
| Protein | 6.5 g | 3.4 g | -47.7% |
| Sodyum | 480 mg | 62 mg | -87.1% |
| Su | 40.2 g | 42.4 g | +5.5% |
| Toplam doymus yağ asitleri | 5.2 g | 7.4 g | +42.3% |
| Toplam Folat | — | 12 µg | — |
| Toplam tekli doymamis yağ asitleri | — | 0.45 g | — |
| Toplam yağ | 10.5 g | 8.6 g | -18.1% |
| Toplam çoklu doymamis yağ asitleri | — | 0.15 g | — |
| Toplam Şeker | 1.8 g | 21.6 g | +1100.0% |
| Çinko | 0.8 mg | 0.72 mg | -10.0% |
Scientific answers to key differences between Amritsari kulcha and Biko.
Biko has less energy per 100 g (268 kcal versus 275 kcal).
For measured Toplam Şeker, Amritsari kulcha has 1.8 g and Biko has 21.6 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: Amritsari kulcha 14, Biko 9.
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.