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
15 kcal
Score
85 / 100
Kırmızı kıvırcık marul has a higher nutrition quality score (93) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
16 vs 15(-6.3%)
Score Diff
93 vs 85(-8.6%)
OVERALL WINNER
Kırmızı kıvırcık marul
Higher energy
Kırmızı kıvırcık marul
Score leader
Kırmızı kıvırcık marul
Nutrient split
17 - 3 (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.
Kırmızı kıvırcık marul and Acur are compared on a 100 g basis. Check each food record for preparation and portion differences.
Per 100 g, Kırmızı kıvırcık marul has 16.0 kcal and Acur has 15.0 kcal. The difference is 1.0 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 93 and 85. 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 | Kırmızı kıvırcık marul | Acur | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| A Vitamini (IU) | 7492 iu | — | — |
| A Vitamini (RAE) | 375 µg | — | — |
| B1 Vitamini (Tiamin) | 0.064 mg | 0.027 mg | -57.8% |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | 0.077 mg | 0.033 mg | -57.1% |
| B6 Vitamini | 0.1 mg | 0.04 mg | -60.0% |
| Bakir | — | 0.041 mg | — |
| Beta Karoten | 4495 µg | 45 µg | -99.0% |
| C Vitamini (askorbik asit) | 3.7 mg | 2.8 mg | -24.3% |
| Demir | 1.2 mg | 0.28 mg | -76.7% |
| Diyet lifi | 0.9 g | 0.5 g | -44.4% |
| E Vitamini (alfa-tokoferol) | 0.15 mg | — | — |
| Folat DFE | — | 7 µg | — |
| Fosfor | 28 mg | 24 mg | -14.3% |
| K Vitamini (filokinon) | 140.3 µg | 16.4 µg | -88.3% |
| Kalsiyum | 33 mg | 16 mg | -51.5% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 2.26 g | 3.63 g | +60.6% |
| Lutein + zeaksantin | 1724 µg | — | — |
| Magnezyum | 12 mg | 13 mg | +8.3% |
| Mangan | 0.375 mg | 0.079 mg | -78.9% |
| Niasin | 0.321 mg | 0.098 mg | -69.5% |
| Potasyum | 187 mg | 147 mg | -21.4% |
| Protein | 1.33 g | 0.65 g | -51.1% |
| Sodyum | 25 mg | 2 mg | -92.0% |
| Su | 95.63 g | 95.23 g | -0.4% |
| Toplam Folat | 36 µg | — | — |
| Toplam yağ | 0.22 g | 0.11 g | -50.0% |
| Toplam Şeker | 0.49 g | 1.67 g | +240.8% |
| Çinko | 0.2 mg | 0.2 mg | 0.0% |
Scientific answers to key differences between Kırmızı kıvırcık marul and Acur.
Acur has less energy per 100 g (15 kcal versus 16 kcal).
For measured Toplam Şeker, Kırmızı kıvırcık marul has 0.49 g and Acur has 1.67 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: Kırmızı kıvırcık marul 93, Acur 85.
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.