Lamb, New Zealand, imported, Intermuscular fat, cooked vs Quinoa, cooked
Nutrition comparison per 100g
🏆
Lamb, New Zealand, imported, Intermuscular fat, cooked
3 wins
🏆
Quinoa, cooked
7 wins
| Nutrient | Lamb, New Zealand, imported, Intermuscular fat, cooked | Quinoa, cooked | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Calories | 596 kcal | 120 kcal ★ | Lamb, New Zealand, imported, Intermuscular fat, cooked has 397% more |
| Protein | 8.53 g ★ | 4.4 g | Lamb, New Zealand, imported, Intermuscular fat, cooked has 94% more |
| Carbs | 0 g | 21.3 g ★ | Quinoa, cooked has 100% more |
| Fat | 62.44 g | 1.92 g ★ | Lamb, New Zealand, imported, Intermuscular fat, cooked has 3152% more |
| Fiber | 0 g | 2.8 g ★ | Quinoa, cooked has 100% more |
| Sugar | 0 g ★ | 0.87 g | Quinoa, cooked has 100% more |
| Sodium | 52 mg | 7 mg ★ | Lamb, New Zealand, imported, Intermuscular fat, cooked has 643% more |
| Calcium | 6 mg | 17 mg ★ | Quinoa, cooked has 65% more |
| Iron | 1.39 mg | 1.49 mg ★ | Quinoa, cooked has 7% more |
| Potassium | 198 mg ★ | 172 mg | Lamb, New Zealand, imported, Intermuscular fat, cooked has 15% more |
Compare Food Groups
Compare whole food groups for a cleaner, averaged breakdown.