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
234 kcal
Score
15 / 100
Chou doufu has a higher nutrition quality score (56) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
137 vs 234(+70.8%)
Score Diff
56 vs 15(-73.2%)
OVERALL WINNER
Chou doufu
Higher energy
Korokke
Score leader
Chou doufu
Nutrient split
11 - 9 (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.
Chou doufu and Korokke are compared on a 100 g basis. Check each food record for preparation and portion differences.
Per 100 g, Chou doufu has 137.0 kcal and Korokke has 234.0 kcal. The difference is 97.0 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 56 and 15. 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 | Chou doufu | Korokke | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| B1 Vitamini (Tiamin) | 0.08 mg | 0.12 mg | +50.0% |
| B12 Vitamini | 0.65 µg | — | — |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | 0.16 mg | 0.06 mg | -62.5% |
| B6 Vitamini | 0.11 mg | 0.22 mg | +100.0% |
| Bakir | 0.28 mg | — | — |
| C Vitamini (askorbik asit) | — | 11.2 mg | — |
| Demir | 2.85 mg | 0.95 mg | -66.7% |
| Diyet lifi | 1.8 g | 2.1 g | +16.7% |
| E Vitamini (alfa-tokoferol) | 0.85 mg | — | — |
| Folat DFE | — | 23 µg | — |
| Fosfor | 145 mg | 72 mg | -50.3% |
| Kalsiyum | 215 mg | 18 mg | -91.6% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 3.8 g | 24.3 g | +539.5% |
| Kolesterol | — | 13 mg | — |
| Kül | 2 g | 1.4 g | -30.0% |
| Magnezyum | 64 mg | 18.5 mg | -71.1% |
| Mangan | 0.72 mg | — | — |
| Niasin | 0.95 mg | 1.48 mg | +55.8% |
| Potasyum | 180 mg | 275 mg | +52.8% |
| Protein | 12.2 g | 5.4 g | -55.7% |
| Selenyum | 9.6 µg | — | — |
| Sodyum | 485 mg | 340 mg | -29.9% |
| Su | 72.1 g | 54.2 g | -24.8% |
| Toplam doymus yağ asitleri | 1.25 g | 3.1 g | +148.0% |
| Toplam Folat | 32 µg | — | — |
| Toplam tekli doymamis yağ asitleri | 1.82 g | 5.3 g | +191.2% |
| Toplam yağ | 8.1 g | 12.8 g | +58.0% |
| Toplam çoklu doymamis yağ asitleri | 4.35 g | 3.6 g | -17.2% |
| Toplam Şeker | — | 1.5 g | — |
| Çinko | 1.45 mg | 0.74 mg | -49.0% |
Scientific answers to key differences between Chou doufu and Korokke.
Chou doufu has less energy per 100 g (137 kcal versus 234 kcal).
For measured Karbonhidrat (farkla), Chou doufu has 3.8 g and Korokke has 24.3 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: Chou doufu 56, Korokke 15.
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.