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
277 kcal
Score
14 / 100
Portakal (Washington) has a higher nutrition quality score (36) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
47 vs 277(+489.4%)
Score Diff
36 vs 14(-61.1%)
OVERALL WINNER
Portakal (Washington)
Higher energy
Acve Hurması
Score leader
Portakal (Washington)
Nutrient split
3 - 16 (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.
Portakal (Washington) and Acve Hurması are compared on a 100 g basis. Check each food record for preparation and portion differences.
Per 100 g, Portakal (Washington) has 47.0 kcal and Acve Hurması has 277.0 kcal. The difference is 230.0 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 36 and 14. 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 | Portakal (Washington) | Acve Hurması | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| A Vitamini (RAE) | 11 µg | — | — |
| B1 Vitamini (Tiamin) | 0.087 mg | 0.05 mg | -42.5% |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | 0.04 mg | 0.06 mg | +50.0% |
| B6 Vitamini | 0.06 mg | 0.25 mg | +316.7% |
| Bakir | 0.045 mg | 0.36 mg | +700.0% |
| Beta Karoten | 71 µg | — | — |
| Beta kriptoksantin | 116 µg | — | — |
| C Vitamini (askorbik asit) | 53.2 mg | 0.4 mg | -99.2% |
| Demir | 0.1 mg | 1 mg | +900.0% |
| Diyet lifi | 2.4 g | 7 g | +191.7% |
| E Vitamini (alfa-tokoferol) | 0.18 mg | — | — |
| Fosfor | 14 mg | 62 mg | +342.9% |
| Fruktoz | — | 31.5 g | — |
| Glikoz | — | 31.8 g | — |
| Kalsiyum | 40 mg | 64 mg | +60.0% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 11.75 g | 75 g | +538.3% |
| Kül | 0.44 g | — | — |
| Magnezyum | 10 mg | 54 mg | +440.0% |
| Mangan | — | 0.26 mg | — |
| Niasin | 0.282 mg | 1.6 mg | +467.4% |
| Potasyum | 181 mg | 656 mg | +262.4% |
| Protein | 0.94 g | 2.5 g | +166.0% |
| Sodyum | 0 mg | 1 mg | — |
| Su | 86.75 g | 21.3 g | -75.4% |
| Toplam Folat | 30 µg | — | — |
| Toplam yağ | 0.12 g | 0.4 g | +233.3% |
| Toplam Şeker | 9.35 g | 63.3 g | +577.0% |
| Çinko | 0.07 mg | 0.44 mg | +528.6% |
Scientific answers to key differences between Portakal (Washington) and Acve Hurması.
Portakal (Washington) has less energy per 100 g (47 kcal versus 277 kcal).
For measured Demir, Portakal (Washington) has 0.1 mg and Acve Hurması has 1 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: Portakal (Washington) 36, Acve Hurması 14.
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.