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
98 kcal
Score
35 / 100
Ajvar has a higher nutrition quality score (35) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
38 vs 98(+157.9%)
Score Diff
0 vs 35(+100.0%)
OVERALL WINNER
Ajvar
Higher energy
Ajvar
Score leader
Ajvar
Nutrient split
8 - 7 (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.
Umeboshi ezmesi and Ajvar are compared on a 100 g basis. Check each food record for preparation and portion differences.
Per 100 g, Umeboshi ezmesi has 38.0 kcal and Ajvar has 98.0 kcal. The difference is 60.0 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 0 and 35. These scores are not personal health outcomes or clinical advice.
15 nutrients have measurements for both records. A dash in the table means no measurement is available; it does not mean zero.
| Nutrients | Umeboshi ezmesi | Ajvar | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| A Vitamini (RAE) | — | 78 µg | — |
| B1 Vitamini (Tiamin) | 0.02 mg | — | — |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | 0.03 mg | — | — |
| B6 Vitamini | — | 0.19 mg | — |
| Bakir | 0.12 mg | — | — |
| Beta Karoten | — | 935 µg | — |
| C Vitamini (askorbik asit) | 3 mg | 62.4 mg | +1980.0% |
| Demir | 1.5 mg | 0.85 mg | -43.3% |
| Diyet lifi | 2.8 g | 2.6 g | -7.1% |
| E Vitamini (alfa-tokoferol) | — | 1.75 mg | — |
| Enerji | 159 kj | — | — |
| Enerji (Atwater Genel Faktörleri) | 38 kcal | — | — |
| Fosfor | 20 mg | 29 mg | +45.0% |
| Kalsiyum | 35 mg | 19 mg | -45.7% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 8.5 g | 8.35 g | -1.8% |
| Kül | 15.3 g | 1.6 g | -89.5% |
| Magnezyum | 18 mg | 15 mg | -16.7% |
| Malik asit | 350 mg | — | — |
| Niasin | 0.3 mg | 0.88 mg | +193.3% |
| Potasyum | 440 mg | 235 mg | -46.6% |
| Protein | 1.2 g | 1.45 g | +20.8% |
| Sitrik asit | 4500 mg | — | — |
| Sodyum | 7500 mg | 490 mg | -93.5% |
| Su | 72 g | 81.8 g | +13.6% |
| Toplam doymus yağ asitleri | — | 0.72 g | — |
| Toplam Folat | — | 21 µg | — |
| Toplam tekli doymamis yağ asitleri | — | 2.85 g | — |
| Toplam yağ | 0.2 g | 5.8 g | +2800.0% |
| Toplam çoklu doymamis yağ asitleri | — | 1.95 g | — |
| Toplam Şeker | — | 4.9 g | — |
| Çinko | 0.22 mg | 0.28 mg | +27.3% |
Scientific answers to key differences between Umeboshi ezmesi and Ajvar.
Umeboshi ezmesi has less energy per 100 g (38 kcal versus 98 kcal).
For measured Toplam yağ, Umeboshi ezmesi has 0.2 g and Ajvar has 5.8 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: Umeboshi ezmesi 0, Ajvar 35.
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.