Ham, minced vs Sweet potato, cooked, baked in skin, flesh, without salt
Nutrition comparison per 100g
🏆
Ham, minced
3 wins
🏆
Sweet potato, cooked, baked in skin, flesh, without salt
8 wins
| Nutrient | Ham, minced | Sweet potato, cooked, baked in skin, flesh, without salt | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Calories | 263 kcal | 90 kcal ★ | Ham, minced has 192% more |
| Protein | 16.28 g ★ | 2.01 g | Ham, minced has 710% more |
| Carbs | 1.84 g | 20.71 g ★ | Sweet potato, cooked, baked in skin, flesh, without salt has 91% more |
| Fat | 20.68 g | 0.15 g ★ | Ham, minced has 13687% more |
| Fiber | 0 g | 3.3 g ★ | Sweet potato, cooked, baked in skin, flesh, without salt has 100% more |
| Sugar | 0 g ★ | 6.48 g | Sweet potato, cooked, baked in skin, flesh, without salt has 100% more |
| Sodium | 1245 mg | 36 mg ★ | Ham, minced has 3358% more |
| Calcium | 10 mg | 38 mg ★ | Sweet potato, cooked, baked in skin, flesh, without salt has 74% more |
| Iron | 0.79 mg ★ | 0.69 mg | Ham, minced has 14% more |
| Vitamin C | 0 mg | 19.6 mg ★ | Sweet potato, cooked, baked in skin, flesh, without salt has 100% more |
| Potassium | 311 mg | 475 mg ★ | Sweet potato, cooked, baked in skin, flesh, without salt has 35% more |
Compare Food Groups
Compare whole food groups for a cleaner, averaged breakdown.