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
69 kcal
Score
18 / 100
Kent mango has a higher nutrition quality score (33) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
60 vs 69(+15.0%)
Score Diff
33 vs 18(-45.5%)
OVERALL WINNER
Kent mango
Higher energy
Alphonse üzümü
Score leader
Kent mango
Nutrient split
11 - 9 (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.
Kent mango and Alphonse üzümü 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 Alphonse üzümü has 69.0 kcal. The difference is 9.0 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 33 and 18. These scores are not personal health outcomes or clinical advice.
20 nutrients have measurements for both records. A dash in the table means no measurement is available; it does not mean zero.
| Nutrients | Kent mango | Alphonse üzümü | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| A Vitamini (RAE) | 54 µg | 3 µg | -94.4% |
| B1 Vitamini (Tiamin) | 0.028 mg | 0.069 mg | +146.4% |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | 0.038 mg | 0.07 mg | +84.2% |
| B6 Vitamini | 0.119 mg | 0.086 mg | -27.7% |
| Bakir | 0.111 mg | 0.127 mg | +14.4% |
| Beta Karoten | 640 µg | — | — |
| C Vitamini (askorbik asit) | 36.4 mg | 3.2 mg | -91.2% |
| Demir | 0.16 mg | 0.36 mg | +125.0% |
| Diyet lifi | 1.6 g | 0.9 g | -43.8% |
| E Vitamini (alfa-tokoferol) | 0.9 mg | — | — |
| Folat DFE | 43 µg | — | — |
| Fosfor | 14 mg | 20 mg | +42.9% |
| Fruktoz | 4.68 g | — | — |
| Glikoz | 2.01 g | — | — |
| K Vitamini (filokinon) | 4.2 µg | 14.6 µg | +247.6% |
| Kalsiyum | 11 mg | 10 mg | -9.1% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 14.98 g | 18.1 g | +20.8% |
| Kül | 0.36 g | — | — |
| Magnezyum | 10 mg | 7 mg | -30.0% |
| Mangan | — | 0.071 mg | — |
| Niasin | 0.669 mg | 0.188 mg | -71.9% |
| Potasyum | 168 mg | 191 mg | +13.7% |
| Protein | 0.82 g | 0.72 g | -12.2% |
| Sakkaroz | 6.97 g | — | — |
| Sodyum | 1 mg | — | — |
| Su | 83.46 g | 80.54 g | -3.5% |
| Toplam Folat | — | 2 µg | — |
| Toplam yağ | 0.38 g | 0.16 g | -57.9% |
| Toplam Şeker | 13.66 g | 15.48 g | +13.3% |
| Çinko | 0.09 mg | 0.07 mg | -22.2% |
Scientific answers to key differences between Kent mango and Alphonse üzümü.
Kent mango has less energy per 100 g (60 kcal versus 69 kcal).
For measured K Vitamini (filokinon), Kent mango has 4.2 µg and Alphonse üzümü has 14.6 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: Kent mango 33, Alphonse üzümü 18.
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.