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
140 kcal
Score
10 / 100
Lawar has a higher nutrition quality score (31) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
166.2 vs 140(-15.8%)
Score Diff
31 vs 10(-67.7%)
OVERALL WINNER
Lawar
Higher energy
Lawar
Score leader
Lawar
Nutrient split
18 - 1 (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.
Lawar and Com nieu are compared on a 100 g basis. Check each food record for preparation and portion differences.
Per 100 g, Lawar has 166.2 kcal and Com nieu has 140.0 kcal. The difference is 26.2 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 31 and 10. 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 | Lawar | Com nieu | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| A Vitamini (RAE) | 36 µg | — | — |
| B1 Vitamini (Tiamin) | 0.09 mg | 0.08 mg | -11.1% |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | 0.12 mg | 0.02 mg | -83.3% |
| B6 Vitamini | — | 0.09 mg | — |
| Bakir | — | 0.08 mg | — |
| Beta Karoten | 285 µg | — | — |
| C Vitamini (askorbik asit) | 8.2 mg | — | — |
| Demir | 2.4 mg | 0.8 mg | -66.7% |
| Diyet lifi | 2.4 g | 0.6 g | -75.0% |
| Enerji | — | 586 kj | — |
| Enerji (Atwater Genel Faktörleri) | — | 140 kcal | — |
| Folat DFE | — | 58 µg | — |
| Fosfor | 110 mg | 43 mg | -60.9% |
| Kalsiyum | 38 mg | 10 mg | -73.7% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 4.5 g | 30.5 g | +577.8% |
| Kolesterol | 32 mg | — | — |
| Kül | 2.6 g | 0.7 g | -73.1% |
| Magnezyum | 27 mg | 14 mg | -48.1% |
| Mangan | — | 0.45 mg | — |
| Niasin | 2.6 mg | 1.5 mg | -42.3% |
| Potasyum | 265 mg | 38 mg | -85.7% |
| Protein | 10.5 g | 2.7 g | -74.3% |
| Selenyum | — | 8.2 µg | — |
| Sodyum | 340 mg | 4 mg | -98.8% |
| Su | 68.2 g | 65.5 g | -4.0% |
| Toplam doymus yağ asitleri | 6.2 g | 0.16 g | -97.4% |
| Toplam tekli doymamis yağ asitleri | 3.2 g | 0.19 g | -94.1% |
| Toplam yağ | 11.8 g | 0.6 g | -94.9% |
| Toplam çoklu doymamis yağ asitleri | 1.2 g | 0.18 g | -85.0% |
| Toplam Şeker | — | 0.1 g | — |
| Çinko | 1.55 mg | 0.55 mg | -64.5% |
Scientific answers to key differences between Lawar and Com nieu.
Com nieu has less energy per 100 g (140 kcal versus 166.2 kcal).
For measured Karbonhidrat (farkla), Lawar has 4.5 g and Com nieu has 30.5 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: Lawar 31, Com nieu 10.
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.
Lawar · Com nieu · Methodology
Analytical Methodology
The scoring algorithm is a scale of 100 based on nutrient density and macro/micro component balance.