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
282 kcal
Score
77 / 100
At least one nutrition score lacks comparable measurements, so no overall winner is assigned.
Energy Diff
0 vs 282
Score Diff
— vs 77
Higher energy
Aleppo biberi
Score leader
Insufficient data
Nutrient split
3 - 10 (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.
Kelt Tuzu (Celtic Sea Salt) and Aleppo biberi are compared on a 100 g basis. Check each food record for preparation and portion differences.
Per 100 g, Kelt Tuzu (Celtic Sea Salt) has 0.0 kcal and Aleppo biberi has 282.0 kcal. The difference is 282.0 kcal.
There are not enough comparable micronutrient measurements for a score comparison.
13 nutrients have measurements for both records. A dash in the table means no measurement is available; it does not mean zero.
| Nutrients | Kelt Tuzu (Celtic Sea Salt) | Aleppo biberi | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| A Vitamini (RAE) | — | 1480 µg | — |
| B1 Vitamini (Tiamin) | — | 0.3 mg | — |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | — | 0.9 mg | — |
| B6 Vitamini | — | 2.1 mg | — |
| Bakir | 0.08 mg | — | — |
| Beta Karoten | — | 17000 µg | — |
| Bor | 180 µg | — | — |
| C Vitamini (askorbik asit) | — | 75 mg | — |
| Demir | 2.4 mg | 14.5 mg | +504.2% |
| Diyet lifi | 0 g | 27.2 g | — |
| E Vitamini (alfa-tokoferol) | — | 28 mg | — |
| Enerji | 0 kj | — | — |
| Enerji (Atwater Genel Faktörleri) | 0 kcal | — | — |
| Florür | 85 µg | — | — |
| Fosfor | 2.5 mg | 290 mg | +11500.0% |
| İyot | 78 µg | — | — |
| Kalsiyum | 190 mg | 148 mg | -22.1% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 0 g | 52 g | — |
| Kül | 92.2 g | — | — |
| Magnezyum | 440 mg | 152 mg | -65.5% |
| Mangan | 0.22 mg | — | — |
| Niasin | — | 8.7 mg | — |
| Potasyum | 115 mg | 1950 mg | +1595.7% |
| Protein | 0 g | 12 g | — |
| Selenyum | 1.2 µg | — | — |
| Sodyum | 33800 mg | 1600 mg | -95.3% |
| Su | 7.8 g | 10.5 g | +34.6% |
| Sulfur, S | 520 mg | — | — |
| Toplam yağ | 0 g | 10 g | — |
| Toplam Şeker | 0 g | 10.3 g | — |
| Çinko | 0.35 mg | 2.4 mg | +585.7% |
Scientific answers to key differences between Kelt Tuzu (Celtic Sea Salt) and Aleppo biberi.
Kelt Tuzu (Celtic Sea Salt) has less energy per 100 g (0 kcal versus 282 kcal).
For measured Fosfor, Kelt Tuzu (Celtic Sea Salt) has 2.5 mg and Aleppo biberi has 290 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: Kelt Tuzu (Celtic Sea Salt) —, Aleppo biberi 77.
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.