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
34 kcal
Score
54 / 100
Misket kavunu has a higher nutrition quality score (54) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
60 vs 34(-43.3%)
Score Diff
33 vs 54(+63.6%)
OVERALL WINNER
Misket kavunu
Higher energy
Kent mango
Score leader
Misket kavunu
Nutrient split
9 - 12 (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 Misket kavunu 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 Misket kavunu has 34.0 kcal. The difference is 26.0 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 33 and 54. These scores are not personal health outcomes or clinical advice.
21 nutrients have measurements for both records. A dash in the table means no measurement is available; it does not mean zero.
| Nutrients | Kent mango | Misket kavunu | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| A Vitamini (RAE) | 54 µg | 169 µg | +213.0% |
| B1 Vitamini (Tiamin) | 0.028 mg | 0.04 mg | +42.9% |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | 0.038 mg | 0.02 mg | -47.4% |
| B6 Vitamini | 0.119 mg | 0.07 mg | -41.2% |
| Bakir | 0.111 mg | 0.04 mg | -64.0% |
| Beta Karoten | 640 µg | 2020 µg | +215.6% |
| C Vitamini (askorbik asit) | 36.4 mg | 36.7 mg | +0.8% |
| Demir | 0.16 mg | 0.21 mg | +31.2% |
| Diyet lifi | 1.6 g | 0.9 g | -43.8% |
| E Vitamini (alfa-tokoferol) | 0.9 mg | — | — |
| Folat DFE | 43 µg | 21 µg | -51.2% |
| Fosfor | 14 mg | — | — |
| Fruktoz | 4.68 g | — | — |
| Glikoz | 2.01 g | — | — |
| K Vitamini (filokinon) | 4.2 µg | — | — |
| Kalsiyum | 11 mg | 9 mg | -18.2% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 14.98 g | 8.16 g | -45.5% |
| Kül | 0.36 g | — | — |
| Magnezyum | 10 mg | 12 mg | +20.0% |
| Niasin | 0.669 mg | 0.73 mg | +9.1% |
| Pantotenik asit | — | 0.1 mg | — |
| Potasyum | 168 mg | 267 mg | +58.9% |
| Protein | 0.82 g | 0.84 g | +2.4% |
| Sakkaroz | 6.97 g | — | — |
| Sodyum | 1 mg | 16 mg | +1500.0% |
| Su | 83.46 g | 90.2 g | +8.1% |
| Toplam yağ | 0.38 g | 0.19 g | -50.0% |
| Toplam Şeker | 13.66 g | 7.86 g | -42.5% |
| Çinko | 0.09 mg | 0.18 mg | +100.0% |
Scientific answers to key differences between Kent mango and Misket kavunu.
Misket kavunu has less energy per 100 g (34 kcal versus 60 kcal).
For measured Sodyum, Kent mango has 1 mg and Misket kavunu has 16 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: Kent mango 33, Misket kavunu 54.
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.