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.
Ruşeym (Buğday Ruşeymi) has a higher nutrition quality score (53) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
360 vs 368(+2.2%)
Score Diff
53 vs 32(-39.6%)
OVERALL WINNER
Ruşeym (Buğday Ruşeymi)
Higher energy
Altın kinoa
Score leader
Ruşeym (Buğday Ruşeymi)
Nutrient split
19 - 2 (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.
Ruşeym (Buğday Ruşeymi) and Altın kinoa are compared on a 100 g basis. Check each food record for preparation and portion differences.
Per 100 g, Ruşeym (Buğday Ruşeymi) has 360.0 kcal and Altın kinoa has 368.0 kcal. The difference is 8.0 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 53 and 32. These scores are not personal health outcomes or clinical advice.
21 nutrients have measurements for both records. A dash in the table means no measurement is available; it does not mean zero.
| Nutrients | Ruşeym (Buğday Ruşeymi) | Altın kinoa | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| B1 Vitamini (Tiamin) | 1.88 mg | 0.36 mg | -80.9% |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | 0.5 mg | 0.32 mg | -36.0% |
| B6 Vitamini | 1.3 mg | 0.49 mg | -62.3% |
| Bakir | 0.8 mg | 0.59 mg | -26.3% |
| Demir | 6.26 mg | 4.57 mg | -27.0% |
| Diyet lifi | 13.2 g | 7 g | -47.0% |
| E Vitamini (alfa-tokoferol) | 14.94 mg | 2.44 mg | -83.7% |
| Enerji (Atwater Genel Faktörleri) | — | 368 kcal | — |
| Fosfor | 842 mg | 457 mg | -45.7% |
| Kalsiyum | 39 mg | 47 mg | +20.5% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 51.8 g | 64.16 g | +23.9% |
| Magnezyum | 239 mg | 197 mg | -17.6% |
| Mangan | 13.3 mg | 2 mg | -85.0% |
| Niasin | 6.81 mg | 1.52 mg | -77.7% |
| Pantotenik asit | 2.26 mg | — | — |
| Potasyum | 892 mg | 563 mg | -36.9% |
| Protein | 23.15 g | 14.12 g | -39.0% |
| Selenyum | 79.2 µg | 8.5 µg | -89.3% |
| Sodyum | 12 mg | 5 mg | -58.3% |
| Su | — | 13.28 g | — |
| Toplam doymus yağ asitleri | 1.67 g | — | — |
| Toplam Folat | 281 µg | 184 µg | -34.5% |
| Toplam tekli doymamis yağ asitleri | 1.38 g | — | — |
| Toplam yağ | 9.72 g | 6.07 g | -37.6% |
| Toplam çoklu doymamis yağ asitleri | 6.03 g | — | — |
| Toplam Şeker | 10 g | 0.1 g | -99.0% |
| Çinko | 12.29 mg | 3.1 mg | -74.8% |
Scientific answers to key differences between Ruşeym (Buğday Ruşeymi) and Altın kinoa.
Ruşeym (Buğday Ruşeymi) has less energy per 100 g (360 kcal versus 368 kcal).
For measured Toplam Şeker, Ruşeym (Buğday Ruşeymi) has 10 g and Altın kinoa has 0.1 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: Ruşeym (Buğday Ruşeymi) 53, Altın kinoa 32.
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.