Skip to content
Foodatron logoFoodatron
Beef bottom round, cooked
Beef bottom round, cooked3
VS
Moose, cooked Leader
Moose, cooked5

Moose, cooked leads 5–3 · 8 categories decided · 2 ties

Each value is per 100 g edible portion.

The verdict

Moose, cooked comes out ahead, winning 5 of 8 nutrient match-ups.

Pick Beef bottom round, cooked for more protein, less sodium and more calcium.

Pick Moose, cooked for less saturated fat, more potassium, more iron, more magnesium and more vitamin C.

Evenly matched on fiber and sugar.

Equal weight (per 100 g)Common servingEqual calories

Head-to-head

  • Energy
    230 kcal
    134 kcal
  • Proteinmore is better
    WIN32.73 g
    29.27 g
  • Carbohydrate
    0 g
    0 g
  • Fibermore is better
    0 g
    0 g
  • Total sugarsless is better
    0 g
    0 g
  • Total fat
    10 g
    0.97 g
  • Saturated fatless is better
    3.59 g
    0.29 gWIN
  • Sodiumless is better
    WIN42 mg
    69 mg
  • Potassiummore is better
    264 mg
    334 mgWIN
  • Calciummore is better
    WIN7 mg
    6 mg
  • Ironmore is better
    2.71 mg
    4.22 mgWIN
  • Magnesiummore is better
    21 mg
    24 mgWIN
  • Vitamin Cmore is better
    0 mg
    5 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.

Beef bottom round, cooked vs Moose, cooked · Foodatron