Amit's data tools
FuelFacts

Fish, cusk, raw vs Fish, ling, raw

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

Fish, cusk, raw

87
kcal per 100 g
Higher calorie
vs

Fish, ling, raw

87
kcal per 100 g

Fish, cusk, raw has more — 87 calories per 100 g against 87 for fish, ling, raw, a difference of 0 kcal (0% more). On protein it is Fish, cusk, raw 19.0 g versus fish, ling, raw 19.0 g per 100 g.

Nutrient by nutrient, per 100 g

Per 100 gFish, cusk, rawFish, ling, rawDifference
Calories87 kcal87 kcal0 kcal
Protein 19.0 g 19.0 g equal
Total fat 0.7 g 0.6 g 0.0 g
Saturated fat 0.1 g 0.1 g 0.0 g
Carbohydrate 0.0 g 0.0 g equal
Fibre 0.0 g 0.0 g equal
Sodium 31.0 mg 135.0 mg 104.0 mg
Potassium 392.0 mg 379.0 mg 13.0 mg
Calcium 10.0 mg 34.0 mg 24.0 mg
Iron 0.8 mg 0.7 mg 0.2 mg
Vitamin C 0.0 mg 0.0 mg equal
Vitamin A 18.0 µg 30.0 µg 12.0 µg
Cholesterol 41.0 mg 40.0 mg 1.0 mg
Water 76.4 g 79.6 g 3.3 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 FoodData Central, SR Legacy. General information only — not medical or nutrition advice. Values are averages for a food type and vary by brand, ripeness and preparation.

One family of free data tools