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
Akça armut has a higher nutrition quality score (19) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
69 vs 57(-17.4%)
Score Diff
18 vs 19(+5.6%)
OVERALL WINNER
Akça armut
Higher energy
Kokulu üzüm
Score leader
Akça armut
Nutrient split
13 - 6 (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.
Kokulu üzüm and Akça armut are compared on a 100 g basis. Check each food record for preparation and portion differences.
Per 100 g, Kokulu üzüm has 69.0 kcal and Akça armut has 57.0 kcal. The difference is 12.0 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 18 and 19. 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 | Kokulu üzüm | Akça armut | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| A Vitamini (RAE) | 3 µg | — | — |
| B1 Vitamini (Tiamin) | 0.069 mg | 0.012 mg | -82.6% |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | 0.07 mg | 0.026 mg | -62.9% |
| B6 Vitamini | 0.086 mg | 0.029 mg | -66.3% |
| Bakir | 0.121 mg | — | — |
| Beta Karoten | 30 µg | — | — |
| C Vitamini (askorbik asit) | 4 mg | 4.3 mg | +7.5% |
| Demir | 0.29 mg | 0.18 mg | -37.9% |
| Diyet lifi | 0.9 g | 3.1 g | +244.4% |
| Enerji (Atwater Genel Faktörleri) | 69 kcal | — | — |
| Folat DFE | 4 µg | 7 µg | +75.0% |
| Fosfor | 20 mg | 12 mg | -40.0% |
| Fruktoz | 8.1 g | 6.22 g | -23.2% |
| Glikoz | 7.21 g | 2.76 g | -61.7% |
| K Vitamini (filokinon) | 14.6 µg | 4.4 µg | -69.9% |
| Kalsiyum | 10 mg | 9 mg | -10.0% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | — | 15.2 g | — |
| Karbonhidrat (toplamla) | 18.1 g | — | — |
| Lutein + zeaksantin | 72 µg | — | — |
| Magnezyum | 7 mg | 7 mg | 0.0% |
| Mangan | 0.071 mg | — | — |
| Niasin | — | 0.161 mg | — |
| Potasyum | 191 mg | 116 mg | -39.3% |
| Protein | 0.72 g | 0.36 g | -50.0% |
| Sakkaroz | 0.17 g | 0.77 g | +352.9% |
| Sodyum | — | 1 mg | — |
| Su | 81.3 g | 83.8 g | +3.1% |
| Toplam yağ | 0.16 g | 0.14 g | -12.5% |
| Toplam Şeker | 15.48 g | 9.75 g | -37.0% |
| Çinko | 0.07 mg | 0.1 mg | +42.9% |
Scientific answers to key differences between Kokulu üzüm and Akça armut.
Akça armut has less energy per 100 g (57 kcal versus 69 kcal).
For measured Sakkaroz, Kokulu üzüm has 0.17 g and Akça armut has 0.77 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: Kokulu üzüm 18, 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.