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
57 kcal
Score
19 / 100
Kent mango has a higher nutrition quality score (33) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
60 vs 57(-5.0%)
Score Diff
33 vs 19(-42.4%)
OVERALL WINNER
Kent mango
Higher energy
Kent mango
Score leader
Kent mango
Nutrient split
14 - 8 (tie: 1)
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.
Kent mango and Akça armut are compared on a 100 g basis. Check each food record for preparation and portion differences.
Per 100 g, Kent mango has 60.0 kcal and Akça armut has 57.0 kcal. The difference is 3.0 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 33 and 19. These scores are not personal health outcomes or clinical advice.
23 nutrients have measurements for both records. A dash in the table means no measurement is available; it does not mean zero.
| Nutrients | Kent mango | Akça armut | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| A Vitamini (RAE) | 54 µg | — | — |
| B1 Vitamini (Tiamin) | 0.028 mg | 0.012 mg | -57.1% |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | 0.038 mg | 0.026 mg | -31.6% |
| B6 Vitamini | 0.119 mg | 0.029 mg | -75.6% |
| Bakir | 0.111 mg | — | — |
| Beta Karoten | 640 µg | — | — |
| C Vitamini (askorbik asit) | 36.4 mg | 4.3 mg | -88.2% |
| Demir | 0.16 mg | 0.18 mg | +12.5% |
| Diyet lifi | 1.6 g | 3.1 g | +93.8% |
| E Vitamini (alfa-tokoferol) | 0.9 mg | — | — |
| Folat DFE | 43 µg | 7 µg | -83.7% |
| Fosfor | 14 mg | 12 mg | -14.3% |
| Fruktoz | 4.68 g | 6.22 g | +32.9% |
| Glikoz | 2.01 g | 2.76 g | +37.3% |
| K Vitamini (filokinon) | 4.2 µg | 4.4 µg | +4.8% |
| Kalsiyum | 11 mg | 9 mg | -18.2% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 14.98 g | 15.2 g | +1.5% |
| Kül | 0.36 g | — | — |
| Magnezyum | 10 mg | 7 mg | -30.0% |
| Niasin | 0.669 mg | 0.161 mg | -75.9% |
| Potasyum | 168 mg | 116 mg | -31.0% |
| Protein | 0.82 g | 0.36 g | -56.1% |
| Sakkaroz | 6.97 g | 0.77 g | -89.0% |
| Sodyum | 1 mg | 1 mg | 0.0% |
| Su | 83.46 g | 83.8 g | +0.4% |
| Toplam yağ | 0.38 g | 0.14 g | -63.2% |
| Toplam Şeker | 13.66 g | 9.75 g | -28.6% |
| Çinko | 0.09 mg | 0.1 mg | +11.1% |
Scientific answers to key differences between Kent mango and Akça armut.
Akça armut has less energy per 100 g (57 kcal versus 60 kcal).
For measured Diyet lifi, Kent mango has 1.6 g and Akça armut has 3.1 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: Kent mango 33, Akça armut 19.
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.