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
137 kcal
Score
56 / 100
Chou doufu has a higher nutrition quality score (56) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
174.5 vs 137(-21.5%)
Score Diff
54 vs 56(+3.7%)
OVERALL WINNER
Chou doufu
Higher energy
Laal maas
Score leader
Chou doufu
Nutrient split
9 - 9 (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.
Laal maas and Chou doufu are compared on a 100 g basis. Check each food record for preparation and portion differences.
Per 100 g, Laal maas has 174.5 kcal and Chou doufu has 137.0 kcal. The difference is 37.5 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 54 and 56. These scores are not personal health outcomes or clinical advice.
18 nutrients have measurements for both records. A dash in the table means no measurement is available; it does not mean zero.
| Nutrients | Laal maas | Chou doufu | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| A Vitamini (RAE) | 48 µg | — | — |
| B1 Vitamini (Tiamin) | — | 0.08 mg | — |
| B12 Vitamini | 1.25 µg | 0.65 µg | -48.0% |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | — | 0.16 mg | — |
| B6 Vitamini | 0.22 mg | 0.11 mg | -50.0% |
| Bakir | — | 0.28 mg | — |
| C Vitamini (askorbik asit) | 4.2 mg | — | — |
| Demir | 2.35 mg | 2.85 mg | +21.3% |
| Diyet lifi | 0.9 g | 1.8 g | +100.0% |
| E Vitamini (alfa-tokoferol) | — | 0.85 mg | — |
| Fosfor | 142 mg | 145 mg | +2.1% |
| Kalsiyum | 36 mg | 215 mg | +497.2% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 2.7 g | 3.8 g | +40.7% |
| Kolesterol | 54 mg | — | — |
| Kül | — | 2 g | — |
| Magnezyum | 21 mg | 64 mg | +204.8% |
| Mangan | — | 0.72 mg | — |
| Niasin | 3.65 mg | 0.95 mg | -74.0% |
| Potasyum | 245 mg | 180 mg | -26.5% |
| Protein | 14.8 g | 12.2 g | -17.6% |
| Selenyum | — | 9.6 µg | — |
| Sodyum | 390 mg | 485 mg | +24.4% |
| Su | 68.4 g | 72.1 g | +5.4% |
| Toplam doymus yağ asitleri | 4.6 g | 1.25 g | -72.8% |
| Toplam Folat | — | 32 µg | — |
| Toplam tekli doymamis yağ asitleri | 4.8 g | 1.82 g | -62.1% |
| Toplam yağ | 11.6 g | 8.1 g | -30.2% |
| Toplam çoklu doymamis yağ asitleri | 1.1 g | 4.35 g | +295.5% |
| Toplam Şeker | 1.2 g | — | — |
| Çinko | 3.1 mg | 1.45 mg | -53.2% |
Scientific answers to key differences between Laal maas and Chou doufu.
Chou doufu has less energy per 100 g (137 kcal versus 174.5 kcal).
For measured Kalsiyum, Laal maas has 36 mg and Chou doufu has 215 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: Laal maas 54, Chou doufu 56.
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.