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
195.7 kcal
Score
23 / 100
Katsuobushi has a higher nutrition quality score (58) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
314 vs 195.7(-37.7%)
Score Diff
58 vs 23(-60.3%)
OVERALL WINNER
Katsuobushi
Higher energy
Katsuobushi
Score leader
Katsuobushi
Nutrient split
9 - 7 (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.
Katsuobushi and Bindaetteok are compared on a 100 g basis. Check each food record for preparation and portion differences.
Per 100 g, Katsuobushi has 314.0 kcal and Bindaetteok has 195.7 kcal. The difference is 118.3 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 58 and 23. These scores are not personal health outcomes or clinical advice.
16 nutrients have measurements for both records. A dash in the table means no measurement is available; it does not mean zero.
| Nutrients | Katsuobushi | Bindaetteok | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| B1 Vitamini (Tiamin) | 0.15 mg | 0.16 mg | +6.7% |
| B12 Vitamini | 15 µg | — | — |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | 0.4 mg | 0.09 mg | -77.5% |
| B6 Vitamini | 0.8 mg | — | — |
| Bakir | — | 0.18 mg | — |
| C Vitamini (askorbik asit) | — | 5.2 mg | — |
| Demir | 9 mg | 1.7 mg | -81.1% |
| DHA (22:6 n-3) | 0.8 g | — | — |
| Diyet lifi | 0 g | 3.8 g | — |
| EPA (20:5 n-3) | 0.2 g | — | — |
| Folat DFE | — | 62 µg | — |
| Fosfor | 800 mg | 125 mg | -84.4% |
| Kalsiyum | 28 mg | 36 mg | +28.6% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 0.8 g | 16.9 g | +2012.5% |
| Kolesterol | 110 mg | — | — |
| Kül | 4.6 g | 1.8 g | -60.9% |
| Magnezyum | 70 mg | 42 mg | -40.0% |
| Niasin | 45 mg | 1.45 mg | -96.8% |
| Potasyum | 940 mg | 290 mg | -69.1% |
| Protein | 70.6 g | 8.4 g | -88.1% |
| Selenyum | 120 µg | — | — |
| Sodyum | 380 mg | 385 mg | +1.3% |
| Su | 18 g | 62.4 g | +246.7% |
| Toplam doymus yağ asitleri | — | 2.1 g | — |
| Toplam tekli doymamis yağ asitleri | — | 4.3 g | — |
| Toplam yağ | 3.2 g | 10.5 g | +228.1% |
| Toplam çoklu doymamis yağ asitleri | — | 3.4 g | — |
| Çinko | 2.5 mg | 1.2 mg | -52.0% |
Scientific answers to key differences between Katsuobushi and Bindaetteok.
Bindaetteok has less energy per 100 g (195.7 kcal versus 314 kcal).
For measured Karbonhidrat (farkla), Katsuobushi has 0.8 g and Bindaetteok has 16.9 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: Katsuobushi 58, Bindaetteok 23.
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.