Skip to content
Foodatron logoFoodatron
Amaranth leaves, cooked
Amaranth leaves, cooked4
VS
Watercress, raw
Watercress, raw4

Dead heat · 8 categories decided

Each value is per 100 g edible portion.

The verdict

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

Pick Amaranth leaves, cooked for more potassium, more calcium, more iron and more magnesium.

Pick Watercress, raw for more protein, less saturated fat, less sodium and more vitamin C.

Equal weight (per 100 g)Common servingEqual calories

Head-to-head

  • Energy
    21 kcal
    11 kcal
  • Proteinmore is better
    2.11 g
    2.3 gWIN
  • Carbohydrate
    4.11 g
    1.29 g
  • Fibermore is better
    —
    0.5 g
  • Total sugarsless is better
    —
    0.2 g
  • Total fat
    0.18 g
    0.1 g
  • Saturated fatless is better
    0.05 g
    0.03 gWIN
  • Sodiumless is better
    257 mg
    41 mgWIN
  • Potassiummore is better
    WIN641 mg
    330 mg
  • Calciummore is better
    WIN209 mg
    120 mg
  • Ironmore is better
    WIN2.26 mg
    0.2 mg
  • Magnesiummore is better
    WIN55 mg
    21 mg
  • Vitamin Cmore is better
    41.1 mg
    43 mgWIN
  • 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 Watercress, raw · Foodatron