Restaurant, Chinese, sweet and sour pork vs Quinoa, cooked
Nutrition comparison per 100g
🏆
Restaurant, Chinese, sweet and sour pork
5 wins
🏆
Quinoa, cooked
6 wins
| Nutrient | Restaurant, Chinese, sweet and sour pork | Quinoa, cooked | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Calories | 270 kcal | 120 kcal ★ | Restaurant, Chinese, sweet and sour pork has 125% more |
| Protein | 8.91 g ★ | 4.4 g | Restaurant, Chinese, sweet and sour pork has 103% more |
| Carbs | 23.34 g ★ | 21.3 g | Restaurant, Chinese, sweet and sour pork has 10% more |
| Fat | 15.66 g | 1.92 g ★ | Restaurant, Chinese, sweet and sour pork has 716% more |
| Fiber | 1 g | 2.8 g ★ | Quinoa, cooked has 64% more |
| Sugar | 10.34 g | 0.87 g ★ | Restaurant, Chinese, sweet and sour pork has 1089% more |
| Sodium | 304 mg | 7 mg ★ | Restaurant, Chinese, sweet and sour pork has 4243% more |
| Calcium | 46 mg ★ | 17 mg | Restaurant, Chinese, sweet and sour pork has 171% more |
| Iron | 3.07 mg ★ | 1.49 mg | Restaurant, Chinese, sweet and sour pork has 106% more |
| Vitamin C | 2.3 mg ★ | 0 mg | Restaurant, Chinese, sweet and sour pork has 0% more |
| Potassium | 152 mg | 172 mg ★ | Quinoa, cooked has 12% more |
Compare Food Groups
Compare whole food groups for a cleaner, averaged breakdown.