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
138 kcal
Score
71 / 100
Alabalık (Kırmızı Benekli) has a higher nutrition quality score (71) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
165 vs 138(-16.4%)
Score Diff
55 vs 71(+29.1%)
OVERALL WINNER
Alabalık (Kırmızı Benekli)
Higher energy
Kuzu İncik
Score leader
Alabalık (Kırmızı Benekli)
Nutrient split
8 - 9 (tie: 2)
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.
Kuzu İncik and Alabalık (Kırmızı Benekli) are compared on a 100 g basis. Check each food record for preparation and portion differences.
Per 100 g, Kuzu İncik has 165.0 kcal and Alabalık (Kırmızı Benekli) has 138.0 kcal. The difference is 27.0 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 55 and 71. These scores are not personal health outcomes or clinical advice.
19 nutrients have measurements for both records. A dash in the table means no measurement is available; it does not mean zero.
| Nutrients | Kuzu İncik | Alabalık (Kırmızı Benekli) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| A Vitamini (RAE) | — | 24 µg | — |
| B1 Vitamini (Tiamin) | 0.11 mg | — | — |
| B12 Vitamini | 2.45 µg | 4.8 µg | +95.9% |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | 0.24 mg | — | — |
| B6 Vitamini | 0.42 mg | — | — |
| D Vitamini | — | 14.2 µg | — |
| Demir | 1.95 mg | 0.85 mg | -56.4% |
| DHA (22:6 n-3) | — | 0.68 g | — |
| Diyet lifi | 0 g | 0 g | — |
| EPA (20:5 n-3) | — | 0.32 g | — |
| Fosfor | 192 mg | 260 mg | +35.4% |
| Kalsiyum | 14 mg | 28 mg | +100.0% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 0 g | 0 g | — |
| Kolesterol | 71 mg | 62 mg | -12.7% |
| Kül | — | 1.3 g | — |
| Magnezyum | 22 mg | 31 mg | +40.9% |
| Niasin | 6.1 mg | 5.2 mg | -14.8% |
| Potasyum | 315 mg | 380 mg | +20.6% |
| Protein | 20.2 g | 20.5 g | +1.5% |
| Selenyum | 26.4 µg | 28.5 µg | +8.0% |
| Sodyum | 68 mg | 56 mg | -17.6% |
| Su | 69.5 g | 75.4 g | +8.5% |
| Toplam doymus yağ asitleri | 3.8 g | 1.25 g | -67.1% |
| Toplam Kolin | 83.5 mg | — | — |
| Toplam tekli doymamis yağ asitleri | 3.7 g | 1.85 g | -50.0% |
| Toplam yağ | 9.2 g | 5.8 g | -37.0% |
| Toplam çoklu doymamis yağ asitleri | 0.72 g | 1.62 g | +125.0% |
| Çinko | 4.52 mg | 0.92 mg | -79.6% |
Scientific answers to key differences between Kuzu İncik and Alabalık (Kırmızı Benekli).
Alabalık (Kırmızı Benekli) has less energy per 100 g (138 kcal versus 165 kcal).
For measured Toplam çoklu doymamis yağ asitleri, Kuzu İncik has 0.72 g and Alabalık (Kırmızı Benekli) has 1.62 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: Kuzu İncik 55, Alabalık (Kırmızı Benekli) 71.
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.