Skip to content
Foodatron logoFoodatron
Acorn squash, cooked Leader
Acorn squash, cooked7
VS
Hubbard squash, cooked
Hubbard squash, cooked2

Acorn squash, cooked leads 7–2 · 9 categories decided

Each value is per 100 g edible portion.

The verdict

Acorn squash, cooked comes out ahead, winning 7 of 9 nutrient match-ups.

Pick Acorn squash, cooked for less saturated fat, less sodium, more potassium, more calcium, more iron, more magnesium and more vitamin C.

Pick Hubbard squash, cooked for more protein and more fiber.

Equal weight (per 100 g)Common servingEqual calories

Head-to-head

  • Energy
    56 kcal
    50 kcal
  • Proteinmore is better
    1.12 g
    2.48 gWIN
  • Carbohydrate
    14.58 g
    10.81 g
  • Fibermore is better
    4.4 g
    4.9 gWIN
  • Total sugarsless is better
    —
    4.9 g
  • Total fat
    0.14 g
    0.62 g
  • Saturated fatless is better
    WIN0.03 g
    0.13 g
  • Sodiumless is better
    WIN4 mg
    244 mg
  • Potassiummore is better
    WIN437 mg
    358 mg
  • Calciummore is better
    WIN44 mg
    17 mg
  • Ironmore is better
    WIN0.93 mg
    0.47 mg
  • Magnesiummore is better
    WIN43 mg
    22 mg
  • Vitamin Cmore is better
    WIN10.8 mg
    9.5 mg
  • Vitamin Dmore is better
    —
    —

Winners are decided by deterministic per-metric rules on the stated basis; ties and missing data don’t score (missing ≠ zero). Educational information only — not medical advice.

Acorn squash, cooked vs Hubbard squash, cooked · Foodatron