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
553 kcal
Score
33 / 100
Kaju (Kavrulmuş, Tuzsuz) has a higher nutrition quality score (33) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
654 vs 553(-15.4%)
Score Diff
15 vs 33(+120.0%)
OVERALL WINNER
Kaju (Kavrulmuş, Tuzsuz)
Higher energy
Ceviz
Score leader
Kaju (Kavrulmuş, Tuzsuz)
Nutrient split
9 - 11 (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.
Ceviz and Kaju (Kavrulmuş, Tuzsuz) are compared on a 100 g basis. Check each food record for preparation and portion differences.
Per 100 g, Ceviz has 654.0 kcal and Kaju (Kavrulmuş, Tuzsuz) has 553.0 kcal. The difference is 101.0 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 15 and 33. 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 | Ceviz | Kaju (Kavrulmuş, Tuzsuz) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| B1 Vitamini (Tiamin) | 0.34 mg | 0.42 mg | +23.5% |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | 0.15 mg | 0.06 mg | -60.0% |
| B6 Vitamini | 0.53 mg | 0.41 mg | -22.6% |
| Bakir | 1.58 mg | 2.19 mg | +38.6% |
| C Vitamini (askorbik asit) | 1.3 mg | — | — |
| Demir | 2.91 mg | 6.68 mg | +129.6% |
| Diyet lifi | 6.7 g | 3.3 g | -50.7% |
| E Vitamini (alfa-tokoferol) | 0.7 mg | — | — |
| Folat DFE | — | 25 µg | — |
| Fosfor | 346 mg | 593 mg | +71.4% |
| Kalsiyum | 98 mg | 37 mg | -62.2% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 13.71 g | 30.19 g | +120.2% |
| Kül | 1.78 g | — | — |
| Magnezyum | 158 mg | 292 mg | +84.8% |
| Mangan | 3.41 mg | 1.65 mg | -51.6% |
| Niasin | 1.12 mg | 1.06 mg | -5.4% |
| Pantotenik asit | 0.57 mg | — | — |
| Potasyum | 441 mg | 660 mg | +49.7% |
| Protein | 15.23 g | 18.22 g | +19.6% |
| Selenyum | — | 19.9 µg | — |
| Su | 4.07 g | 2.5 g | -38.6% |
| Toplam doymus yağ asitleri | 6.13 g | 7.78 g | +26.9% |
| Toplam Folat | 98 µg | — | — |
| Toplam tekli doymamis yağ asitleri | 8.93 g | 23.8 g | +166.5% |
| Toplam yağ | 65.21 g | 43.85 g | -32.8% |
| Toplam çoklu doymamis yağ asitleri | 47.17 g | 7.84 g | -83.4% |
| Çinko | 3.09 mg | 5.78 mg | +87.1% |
Scientific answers to key differences between Ceviz and Kaju (Kavrulmuş, Tuzsuz).
Kaju (Kavrulmuş, Tuzsuz) has less energy per 100 g (553 kcal versus 654 kcal).
For measured Toplam tekli doymamis yağ asitleri, Ceviz has 8.93 g and Kaju (Kavrulmuş, Tuzsuz) has 23.8 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: Ceviz 15, Kaju (Kavrulmuş, Tuzsuz) 33.
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.