Head to head

Figs, raw vs Limes, raw

Side by side, per 100 g, from the same USDA reference data.

Limes, raw

kcal per 100 g

Figs, raw has more — 74 calories per 100 g against 30 for limes, raw, a difference of 44 kcal (147% more). On protein it is Figs, raw 0.8 g versus limes, raw 0.7 g per 100 g.

SOURCE·USDA SR Legacy·REVIEWED JUL 2026

Nutrient by nutrient, per 100 g

Per 100 g	Figs, raw	Limes, raw	Difference
Calories	74 kcal	30 kcal	44 kcal
Protein	0.8 g	0.7 g	0.1 g
Total fat	0.3 g	0.2 g	0.1 g
Saturated fat	0.1 g	0.0 g	0.0 g
Carbohydrate	19.2 g	10.5 g	8.6 g
Fibre	2.9 g	2.8 g	0.1 g
Sugars	16.3 g	1.7 g	14.6 g
Sodium	1.0 mg	2.0 mg	1.0 mg
Potassium	232.0 mg	102.0 mg	130.0 mg
Calcium	35.0 mg	33.0 mg	2.0 mg
Iron	0.4 mg	0.6 mg	0.2 mg
Vitamin C	2.0 mg	29.1 mg	27.1 mg
Vitamin A	7.0 µg	2.0 µg	5.0 µg
Cholesterol	0.0 mg	0.0 mg	equal
Water	79.1 g	88.3 g	9.2 g

Highlighted cells are the higher of the two. "Higher" is not automatically "better" — it depends entirely on what you are trying to do.

SOURCE·USDA SR Legacy·REVIEWED JUL 2026

How this is worked out

Both columns are the same USDA release, per 100 g of edible portion — the only basis on which two different foods can honestly be set side by side.
The difference column is the two published figures subtracted, not a scaled or normalised score.
The percentage in the answer is the higher figure over the lower, minus one — a ratio, so it does not change with serving size.

difference = |A − B|                (per 100 g)
"% more"   = (higher ÷ lower − 1) × 100

Full data & method →

The question this page settles

Which has more calories, figs, raw or limes, raw?