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
79 kcal
Score
98 / 100
Cockle midyesi has a higher nutrition quality score (98) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
250 vs 79(-68.4%)
Score Diff
6 vs 98(+1533.3%)
OVERALL WINNER
Cockle midyesi
Higher energy
Balzamik glaze
Score leader
Cockle midyesi
Nutrient split
1 - 12 (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.
Balzamik glaze and Cockle midyesi are compared on a 100 g basis. Check each food record for preparation and portion differences.
Per 100 g, Balzamik glaze has 250.0 kcal and Cockle midyesi has 79.0 kcal. The difference is 171.0 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 6 and 98. These scores are not personal health outcomes or clinical advice.
14 nutrients have measurements for both records. A dash in the table means no measurement is available; it does not mean zero.
| Nutrients | Balzamik glaze | Cockle midyesi | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| A Vitamini (RAE) | — | 28 µg | — |
| B12 Vitamini | — | 49 µg | — |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | — | 0.21 mg | — |
| Bakir | 0.08 mg | 0.35 mg | +337.5% |
| C Vitamini (askorbik asit) | — | 8 mg | — |
| Demir | 0.72 mg | 16.2 mg | +2150.0% |
| Diyet lifi | 0 g | 0 g | — |
| Enerji | 1046 kj | — | — |
| Enerji (Atwater Genel Faktörleri) | 250 kcal | — | — |
| Fosfor | 22 mg | 170 mg | +672.7% |
| Fruktoz | 26.5 g | — | — |
| Glikoz | 27.2 g | — | — |
| Kalsiyum | 27 mg | 92 mg | +240.7% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 60.5 g | 4.7 g | -92.2% |
| Kolesterol | — | 50 mg | — |
| Kül | 1.8 g | 1.9 g | +5.6% |
| Magnezyum | 16 mg | 50 mg | +212.5% |
| Mangan | 0.15 mg | — | — |
| Niasin | — | 1.8 mg | — |
| Potasyum | 210 mg | 314 mg | +49.5% |
| Protein | 0.8 g | 13.5 g | +1587.5% |
| Selenyum | — | 24.3 µg | — |
| Sodyum | 35 mg | 290 mg | +728.6% |
| Su | 36.8 g | 79.2 g | +115.2% |
| Toplam yağ | 0.1 g | 0.7 g | +600.0% |
| Toplam Şeker | 54.2 g | — | — |
| Çinko | 0.12 mg | 2.4 mg | +1900.0% |
Scientific answers to key differences between Balzamik glaze and Cockle midyesi.
Cockle midyesi has less energy per 100 g (79 kcal versus 250 kcal).
For measured Demir, Balzamik glaze has 0.72 mg and Cockle midyesi has 16.2 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: Balzamik glaze 6, Cockle midyesi 98.
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.