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
263 kcal
Score
6 / 100
Hurma Şurubu has a higher nutrition quality score (15) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
281 vs 263(-6.4%)
Score Diff
15 vs 6(-60.0%)
OVERALL WINNER
Hurma Şurubu
Higher energy
Hurma Şurubu
Score leader
Hurma Şurubu
Nutrient split
16 - 1 (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.
Hurma Şurubu and Ahududu reçeli are compared on a 100 g basis. Check each food record for preparation and portion differences.
Per 100 g, Hurma Şurubu has 281.0 kcal and Ahududu reçeli has 263.0 kcal. The difference is 18.0 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 15 and 6. These scores are not personal health outcomes or clinical advice.
17 nutrients have measurements for both records. A dash in the table means no measurement is available; it does not mean zero.
| Nutrients | Hurma Şurubu | Ahududu reçeli | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| A Vitamini (RAE) | — | 2 µg | — |
| B1 Vitamini (Tiamin) | 0.05 mg | — | — |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | 0.08 mg | — | — |
| B6 Vitamini | 0.18 mg | — | — |
| Bakir | 0.24 mg | 0.04 mg | -83.3% |
| C Vitamini (askorbik asit) | — | 8 mg | — |
| Demir | 1.85 mg | 0.4 mg | -78.4% |
| Diyet lifi | 2.1 g | 1.1 g | -47.6% |
| Enerji (Atwater Genel Faktörleri) | — | 263 kcal | — |
| Folat DFE | 16 µg | 5 µg | -68.8% |
| Fosfor | 46 mg | 9 mg | -80.4% |
| Fruktoz | 30.8 g | — | — |
| Glikoz | 32.5 g | — | — |
| K Vitamini (filokinon) | — | 1.2 µg | — |
| Kalsiyum | 56 mg | 15 mg | -73.2% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 68.5 g | 68 g | -0.7% |
| Kül | 1.5 g | 0.3 g | -80.0% |
| Magnezyum | 52 mg | 6 mg | -88.5% |
| Mangan | 0.32 mg | 0.15 mg | -53.1% |
| Niasin | 1.35 mg | — | — |
| Potasyum | 710 mg | 77 mg | -89.2% |
| Protein | 1.4 g | 0.4 g | -71.4% |
| Sakkaroz | 0.9 g | — | — |
| Sodyum | 22 mg | 12 mg | -45.5% |
| Su | 26.3 g | 30.2 g | +14.8% |
| Toplam doymus yağ asitleri | 0.05 g | — | — |
| Toplam yağ | 0.2 g | 0.1 g | -50.0% |
| Toplam Şeker | 64.2 g | 60.3 g | -6.1% |
| Çinko | 0.38 mg | 0.08 mg | -78.9% |
Scientific answers to key differences between Hurma Şurubu and Ahududu reçeli.
Ahududu reçeli has less energy per 100 g (263 kcal versus 281 kcal).
For measured Potasyum, Hurma Şurubu has 710 mg and Ahududu reçeli has 77 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: Hurma Şurubu 15, Ahududu reçeli 6.
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.