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
41 kcal
Score
44 / 100
Balkabağı (Çiğ) has a higher nutrition quality score (83) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
26 vs 41(+57.7%)
Score Diff
83 vs 44(-47.0%)
OVERALL WINNER
Balkabağı (Çiğ)
Higher energy
Havuç
Score leader
Balkabağı (Çiğ)
Nutrient split
6 - 9 (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.
Balkabağı (Çiğ) and Havuç are compared on a 100 g basis. Check each food record for preparation and portion differences.
Per 100 g, Balkabağı (Çiğ) has 26.0 kcal and Havuç has 41.0 kcal. The difference is 15.0 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 83 and 44. 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 | Balkabağı (Çiğ) | Havuç | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| A Vitamini (RAE) | 426 µg | 835 µg | +96.0% |
| Alfa Karoten | — | 3477 µg | — |
| B1 Vitamini (Tiamin) | 0.05 mg | — | — |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | 0.11 mg | — | — |
| B6 Vitamini | 0.061 mg | 0.138 mg | +126.2% |
| Bakir | 0.127 mg | — | — |
| Beta Karoten | 3100 µg | 8285 µg | +167.3% |
| C Vitamini (askorbik asit) | 9 mg | 5.9 mg | -34.4% |
| Demir | 0.8 mg | 0.3 mg | -62.5% |
| Diyet lifi | 0.5 g | 2.8 g | +460.0% |
| Enerji (Atwater Genel Faktörleri) | — | 41 kcal | — |
| Folat DFE | — | 19 µg | — |
| Fosfor | 44 mg | 35 mg | -20.5% |
| Fruktoz | — | 0.59 g | — |
| Glikoz | — | 1.94 g | — |
| K Vitamini (filokinon) | — | 13.2 µg | — |
| Kalsiyum | 21 mg | 33 mg | +57.1% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 6.5 g | — | — |
| Karbonhidrat (toplamla) | — | 9.61 g | — |
| Magnezyum | 12 mg | 12 mg | 0.0% |
| Mangan | 0.125 mg | 0.141 mg | +12.8% |
| Niasin | 0.6 mg | 0.983 mg | +63.8% |
| Potasyum | 340 mg | 320 mg | -5.9% |
| Protein | 1 g | 0.93 g | -7.0% |
| Sakkaroz | — | 2.29 g | — |
| Sodyum | 1 mg | 69 mg | +6800.0% |
| Su | 91.6 g | 88.29 g | -3.6% |
| Toplam Folat | 16 µg | — | — |
| Toplam yağ | 0.1 g | 0.24 g | +140.0% |
| Toplam Şeker | — | 4.74 g | — |
| Çinko | 0.32 mg | — | — |
Scientific answers to key differences between Balkabağı (Çiğ) and Havuç.
Balkabağı (Çiğ) has less energy per 100 g (26 kcal versus 41 kcal).
For measured Sodyum, Balkabağı (Çiğ) has 1 mg and Havuç has 69 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: Balkabağı (Çiğ) 83, Havuç 44.
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.