Skip to content
Foodatron logoFoodatron
Amaranth leaves, cooked
Amaranth leaves, cooked4
VS
Swiss chard, cooked
Swiss chard, cooked4

Dead heat · 8 categories decided

Both foods compared at 100 kcal.

The verdict

It's a dead heat — each wins 4 of 8 match-ups.

Pick Amaranth leaves, cooked for more protein, more potassium, more calcium and more vitamin C.

Pick Swiss chard, cooked for less saturated fat, less sodium, more iron and more magnesium.

Equal weight (per 100 g)Common servingEqual calories

Head-to-head

  • Energy
    100 kcal
    100 kcal
  • Proteinmore is better
    WIN10.05 g
    9.4 g
  • Carbohydrate
    19.57 g
    20.65 g
  • Fibermore is better
    —
    10.5 g
  • Total sugarsless is better
    —
    5.5 g
  • Total fat
    0.86 g
    0.4 g
  • Saturated fatless is better
    0.24 g
    0.06 gWIN
  • Sodiumless is better
    1223.81 mg
    895 mgWIN
  • Potassiummore is better
    WIN3052.38 mg
    2745 mg
  • Calciummore is better
    WIN995.24 mg
    290 mg
  • Ironmore is better
    10.76 mg
    11.3 mgWIN
  • Magnesiummore is better
    261.9 mg
    430 mgWIN
  • Vitamin Cmore is better
    WIN195.71 mg
    90 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.

Amaranth leaves, cooked vs Swiss chard, cooked · Foodatron