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
141 kcal
Score
58 / 100
Kum midyesi has a higher nutrition quality score (95) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
74 vs 141(+90.5%)
Score Diff
95 vs 58(-38.9%)
OVERALL WINNER
Kum midyesi
Higher energy
Ala balığı
Score leader
Kum midyesi
Nutrient split
7 - 12 (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.
Kum midyesi and Ala balığı are compared on a 100 g basis. Check each food record for preparation and portion differences.
Per 100 g, Kum midyesi has 74.0 kcal and Ala balığı has 141.0 kcal. The difference is 67.0 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 95 and 58. 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 | Kum midyesi | Ala balığı | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| A Vitamini (RAE) | 90 µg | — | — |
| B1 Vitamini (Tiamin) | 0.09 mg | — | — |
| B12 Vitamini | 49.4 µg | 4.15 µg | -91.6% |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | 0.21 mg | — | — |
| B6 Vitamini | 0.05 mg | 0.35 mg | +600.0% |
| Bakir | 0.34 mg | — | — |
| C Vitamini (askorbik asit) | 13 mg | — | — |
| D Vitamini | — | 3.9 µg | — |
| Demir | 13.98 mg | 0.7 mg | -95.0% |
| DHA (22:6 n-3) | — | 0.52 g | — |
| Diyet lifi | 0 g | 0 g | — |
| EPA (20:5 n-3) | — | 0.22 g | — |
| Fosfor | 169 mg | 245 mg | +45.0% |
| Kalsiyum | 46 mg | 67 mg | +45.7% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 2.57 g | 0 g | -100.0% |
| Kolesterol | 34 mg | 59 mg | +73.5% |
| Kül | — | 1.22 g | — |
| Magnezyum | 18 mg | 25 mg | +38.9% |
| Niasin | 1.76 mg | 5.38 mg | +205.7% |
| Potasyum | 314 mg | 361 mg | +15.0% |
| Protein | 12.77 g | 19.94 g | +56.1% |
| Selenyum | 24.3 µg | 12.6 µg | -48.1% |
| Sodyum | 56 mg | 51 mg | -8.9% |
| Su | 81.82 g | 71.87 g | -12.2% |
| Toplam doymus yağ asitleri | 0.19 g | 1.39 g | +631.6% |
| Toplam tekli doymamis yağ asitleri | 0.11 g | 2.03 g | +1745.5% |
| Toplam yağ | 0.97 g | 6.18 g | +537.1% |
| Toplam çoklu doymamis yağ asitleri | 0.28 g | 1.73 g | +517.9% |
| Toplam Şeker | — | 0 g | — |
| Çinko | 1.37 mg | 0.66 mg | -51.8% |
Scientific answers to key differences between Kum midyesi and Ala balığı.
Kum midyesi has less energy per 100 g (74 kcal versus 141 kcal).
For measured Toplam tekli doymamis yağ asitleri, Kum midyesi has 0.11 g and Ala balığı has 2.03 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: Kum midyesi 95, Ala balığı 58.
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.