Head to head

Limes, raw vs Rowal, raw

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

Rowal, raw

111

kcal per 100 g

Higher calorie

Rowal, raw has more — 111 calories per 100 g against 30 for limes, raw, a difference of 81 kcal (270% more). On protein it is Limes, raw 0.7 g versus rowal, raw 2.3 g per 100 g.

SOURCE·USDA SR Legacy·REVIEWED JUL 2026

Nutrient by nutrient, per 100 g

Per 100 g	Limes, raw	Rowal, raw	Difference
Calories	30 kcal	111 kcal	81 kcal
Protein	0.7 g	2.3 g	1.6 g
Total fat	0.2 g	2.0 g	1.8 g
Saturated fat	0.0 g	0.3 g	0.2 g
Carbohydrate	10.5 g	23.9 g	13.4 g
Fibre	2.8 g	6.2 g	3.4 g
Sugars	1.7 g	14.1 g	12.4 g
Sodium	2.0 mg	4.0 mg	2.0 mg
Potassium	102.0 mg	131.0 mg	29.0 mg
Calcium	33.0 mg	15.0 mg	18.0 mg
Iron	0.6 mg	2.2 mg	1.6 mg
Vitamin C	29.1 mg	25.8 mg	3.3 mg
Vitamin A	2.0 µg	19.0 µg	17.0 µg
Cholesterol	0.0 mg	— mg	—
Water	88.3 g	71.4 g	16.9 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, limes, raw or rowal, raw?