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
116 kcal
Score
67 / 100
At least one nutrition score lacks comparable measurements, so no overall winner is assigned.
Energy Diff
161 vs 116(-28.0%)
Score Diff
— vs 67
Higher energy
Av Eti - Çiğ
Score leader
Insufficient data
Nutrient split
6 - 9 (tie: 2)
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.
Av Eti, Ayı Eti, Çiğ and Çiğ Bizon Antrikot are compared on a 100 g basis. Check each food record for preparation and portion differences.
Per 100 g, Av Eti, Ayı Eti, Çiğ has 161.0 kcal and Çiğ Bizon Antrikot has 116.0 kcal. The difference is 45.0 kcal.
There are not enough comparable micronutrient measurements for a score comparison.
17 nutrients have measurements for both records. A dash in the table means no measurement is available; it does not mean zero.
| Nutrients | Av Eti - Çiğ | Çiğ Bizon Antrikot | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| A Vitamini (IU) | 0 iu | 3 iu | — |
| A Vitamini (RAE) | 0 µg | 1 µg | — |
| Alanin | — | 1.26 g | — |
| Arjinin | — | 1.31 g | — |
| Aspartik asit | — | 1.92 g | — |
| B1 Vitamini (Tiamin) | 0.16 mg | 0.05 mg | -68.8% |
| B12 Vitamini | — | 2.2 µg | — |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | 0.68 mg | 0.09 mg | -86.8% |
| B6 Vitamini | — | 0.25 mg | — |
| Bakir | — | 0.13 mg | — |
| C Vitamini (askorbik asit) | 0 mg | 0 mg | — |
| Demir | 6.65 mg | 2.8 mg | -57.9% |
| Diyet lifi | 0 g | — | — |
| E Vitamini (alfa-tokoferol) | — | 0.04 mg | — |
| Enerji | 674 kj | 116 kj | -82.8% |
| Fenilalanin | — | 0.83 g | — |
| Fosfor | 151 mg | 198 mg | +31.1% |
| Gama tokoferol | — | 0.01 mg | — |
| Glisin | — | 1.06 g | — |
| Glutamik asit | — | 3.22 g | — |
| Histidin | — | 0.59 g | — |
| Izolosin | — | 0.93 g | — |
| Kalsiyum | 3 mg | 6 mg | +100.0% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 0 g | 0 g | — |
| Kolesterol | — | 62 mg | — |
| Kül | 0.7 g | 1.2 g | +71.4% |
| Lizin | — | 1.72 g | — |
| Losin | — | 1.72 g | — |
| Magnezyum | — | 24 mg | — |
| Mangan | — | 0.01 mg | — |
| Metiyonin | — | 0.52 g | — |
| MUFA 14:1 | — | 0 g | — |
| MUFA 16:1 | — | 0.05 g | — |
| MUFA 18:1 (oleik asit) | — | 0.92 g | — |
| MUFA 20:1 | — | 0.01 g | — |
| MUFA 22:1 | — | 0.02 g | — |
| Niasin | 3.2 mg | 1.84 mg | -42.5% |
| Potasyum | — | 344 mg | — |
| Prolin | — | 0.88 g | — |
| Protein | 20.1 g | 22.1 g | +10.0% |
| PUFA 18:2 (linoleik asit) | — | 0.18 g | — |
| PUFA 18:3 | — | 0.01 g | — |
| Retinol | 0 µg | 1 µg | — |
| Selenyum | 8.3 µg | 23.3 µg | +180.7% |
| Serin | — | 0.84 g | — |
| SFA 14:0 | — | 0.03 g | — |
| SFA 15:0 | — | 0.05 g | — |
| SFA 16:0 (palmitik asit) | — | 0.36 g | — |
| SFA 17:0 | — | 0.03 g | — |
| SFA 18:0 (stearik asit) | — | 0.4 g | — |
| SFA 22:0 | — | 0.04 g | — |
| Sistin | — | 0 g | — |
| Sodyum | — | 48 mg | — |
| Su | 71.2 g | 74 g | +3.9% |
| Tirozin | — | 0.71 g | — |
| Toplam doymus yağ asitleri | — | 0.9 g | — |
| Toplam tekli doymamis yağ asitleri | — | 1 g | — |
| Toplam yağ | 8.3 g | 2.4 g | -71.1% |
| Toplam çoklu doymamis yağ asitleri | — | 0.19 g | — |
| Treonin | — | 0.91 g | — |
| Triptofan | — | 0 g | — |
| Valin | — | 1 g | — |
| Çinko | — | 3.2 mg | — |
Scientific answers to key differences between Av Eti, Ayı Eti, Çiğ and Çiğ Bizon Antrikot.
Çiğ Bizon Antrikot has less energy per 100 g (116 kcal versus 161 kcal).
For measured Selenyum, Av Eti - Çiğ has 8.3 µg and Çiğ Bizon Antrikot has 23.3 µg 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: Av Eti - Çiğ —, Çiğ Bizon Antrikot 67.
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.