Beef, New Zealand, imported, subcutaneous fat, cooked vs Quinoa, cooked
Nutrition comparison per 100g
🏆
Beef, New Zealand, imported, subcutaneous fat, cooked
3 wins
🏆
Quinoa, cooked
7 wins
| Nutrient | Beef, New Zealand, imported, subcutaneous fat, cooked | Quinoa, cooked | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Calories | 731 kcal | 120 kcal ★ | Beef, New Zealand, imported, subcutaneous fat, cooked has 509% more |
| Protein | 6.5 g ★ | 4.4 g | Beef, New Zealand, imported, subcutaneous fat, cooked has 48% more |
| Carbs | 0 g | 21.3 g ★ | Quinoa, cooked has 100% more |
| Fat | 78.3 g | 1.92 g ★ | Beef, New Zealand, imported, subcutaneous fat, cooked has 3978% more |
| Fiber | 0 g | 2.8 g ★ | Quinoa, cooked has 100% more |
| Sugar | 0 g ★ | 0.87 g | Quinoa, cooked has 100% more |
| Sodium | 25 mg | 7 mg ★ | Beef, New Zealand, imported, subcutaneous fat, cooked has 257% more |
| Calcium | 17 mg ★ | 17 mg | Equal |
| Iron | 0.47 mg | 1.49 mg ★ | Quinoa, cooked has 68% more |
| Potassium | 129 mg | 172 mg ★ | Quinoa, cooked has 25% more |
Compare Food Groups
Compare whole food groups for a cleaner, averaged breakdown.