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
20 kcal
Score
100 / 100
Kuşkonmaz (Taze, Çiğ) has a higher nutrition quality score (100) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
28 vs 20(-28.6%)
Score Diff
94 vs 100(+6.4%)
OVERALL WINNER
Kuşkonmaz (Taze, Çiğ)
Higher energy
Ebegümeci, Çiğ
Score leader
Kuşkonmaz (Taze, Çiğ)
Nutrient split
10 - 8 (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.
Ebegümeci, Çiğ and Kuşkonmaz (Taze, Çiğ) are compared on a 100 g basis. Check each food record for preparation and portion differences.
Per 100 g, Ebegümeci, Çiğ has 28.0 kcal and Kuşkonmaz (Taze, Çiğ) has 20.0 kcal. The difference is 8.0 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 94 and 100. These scores are not personal health outcomes or clinical advice.
18 nutrients have measurements for both records. A dash in the table means no measurement is available; it does not mean zero.
| Nutrients | Ebegümeci, Çiğ | Kuşkonmaz (Taze, Çiğ) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| A Vitamini (RAE) | 312 µg | 38 µg | -87.8% |
| B1 Vitamini (Tiamin) | 0.08 mg | 0.143 mg | +78.7% |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | 0.11 mg | 0.141 mg | +28.2% |
| Bakir | — | 0.189 mg | — |
| Beta Karoten | 3740 µg | — | — |
| C Vitamini (askorbik asit) | 34.2 mg | 5.6 mg | -83.6% |
| Demir | 1.2 mg | 2.14 mg | +78.3% |
| Diyet lifi | 3.2 g | 2.1 g | -34.4% |
| E Vitamini (alfa-tokoferol) | — | 1.13 mg | — |
| Enerji (Atwater Özel Faktörleri) | — | 20 kcal | — |
| Folat DFE | — | 52 µg | — |
| Fosfor | 36 mg | 52 mg | +44.4% |
| K Vitamini (filokinon) | 410 µg | 41.6 µg | -89.9% |
| Kalsiyum | 249 mg | 24 mg | -90.4% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 4.8 g | 3.88 g | -19.2% |
| Magnezyum | 38 mg | 14 mg | -63.2% |
| Mangan | — | 0.158 mg | — |
| Niasin | 0.4 mg | 0.978 mg | +144.5% |
| Potasyum | 448 mg | 202 mg | -54.9% |
| Protein | 2.1 g | 2.2 g | +4.8% |
| Sodyum | 12 mg | 2 mg | -83.3% |
| Su | 84.5 g | 93.22 g | +10.3% |
| Toplam Folat | 28 µg | — | — |
| Toplam yağ | 0.2 g | 0.12 g | -40.0% |
| Toplam Şeker | — | 1.88 g | — |
| Çinko | 0.3 mg | 0.54 mg | +80.0% |
Scientific answers to key differences between Ebegümeci, Çiğ and Kuşkonmaz (Taze, Çiğ).
Kuşkonmaz (Taze, Çiğ) has less energy per 100 g (20 kcal versus 28 kcal).
For measured Niasin, Ebegümeci, Çiğ has 0.4 mg and Kuşkonmaz (Taze, Çiğ) has 0.978 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: Ebegümeci, Çiğ 94, Kuşkonmaz (Taze, Çiğ) 100.
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.