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
195.6 kcal
Score
20 / 100
Ares has a higher nutrition quality score (51) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
164.2 vs 195.6(+19.1%)
Score Diff
51 vs 20(-60.8%)
OVERALL WINNER
Ares
Higher energy
Tangbao
Score leader
Ares
Nutrient split
17 - 4 (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.
Ares and Tangbao are compared on a 100 g basis. Check each food record for preparation and portion differences.
Per 100 g, Ares has 164.2 kcal and Tangbao has 195.6 kcal. The difference is 31.4 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 51 and 20. These scores are not personal health outcomes or clinical advice.
21 nutrients have measurements for both records. A dash in the table means no measurement is available; it does not mean zero.
| Nutrients | Ares | Tangbao | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| B1 Vitamini (Tiamin) | — | 0.16 mg | — |
| B12 Vitamini | 1.2 µg | 0.35 µg | -70.8% |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | — | 0.09 mg | — |
| B6 Vitamini | 0.32 mg | — | — |
| C Vitamini (askorbik asit) | 4.2 mg | — | — |
| Demir | 1.9 mg | 1.3 mg | -31.6% |
| Diyet lifi | 1.1 g | 1 g | -9.1% |
| Fosfor | 165 mg | 85 mg | -48.5% |
| Kalsiyum | 28 mg | 18 mg | -35.7% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 3.8 g | 20.8 g | +447.4% |
| Kolesterol | 48 mg | 28 mg | -41.7% |
| Kül | 1.6 g | 1.35 g | -15.6% |
| Magnezyum | 22 mg | 14 mg | -36.4% |
| Niasin | 3.6 mg | 1.75 mg | -51.4% |
| Potasyum | 295 mg | 145 mg | -50.8% |
| Protein | 15.2 g | 9.2 g | -39.5% |
| Sodyum | 380 mg | 415 mg | +9.2% |
| Su | 68.5 g | 59.2 g | -13.6% |
| Toplam doymus yağ asitleri | 3.2 g | 2.85 g | -10.9% |
| Toplam Folat | 18 µg | 24 µg | +33.3% |
| Toplam tekli doymamis yağ asitleri | 4.6 g | 3.75 g | -18.5% |
| Toplam yağ | 9.8 g | 8.4 g | -14.3% |
| Toplam çoklu doymamis yağ asitleri | 1.1 g | 1.15 g | +4.5% |
| Toplam Şeker | 1.5 g | 1.2 g | -20.0% |
| Çinko | 2.4 mg | 1.15 mg | -52.1% |
Scientific answers to key differences between Ares and Tangbao.
Ares has less energy per 100 g (164.2 kcal versus 195.6 kcal).
For measured Karbonhidrat (farkla), Ares has 3.8 g and Tangbao has 20.8 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: Ares 51, Tangbao 20.
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.
Ares · Tangbao · Methodology
Analytical Methodology
The scoring algorithm is a scale of 100 based on nutrient density and macro/micro component balance.