Skip to content
Foodatron logoFoodatron
Beef chuck roast, cooked Leader
Beef chuck roast, cooked7
VS
Beef frankfurter (hot dog)
Beef frankfurter (hot dog)1

Beef chuck roast, cooked leads 7–1 · 8 categories decided · 2 ties

Each value is per 100 g edible portion.

The verdict

Beef chuck roast, cooked comes out ahead, winning 7 of 8 nutrient match-ups.

Pick Beef chuck roast, cooked for more protein, less sugar, less saturated fat, less sodium, more calcium, more iron and more magnesium.

Pick Beef frankfurter (hot dog) for more potassium.

Evenly matched on fiber and vitamin C.

Equal weight (per 100 g)Common servingEqual calories

Head-to-head

  • Energy
    283 kcal
    315 kcal
  • Proteinmore is better
    WIN29.23 g
    11.69 g
  • Carbohydrate
    0 g
    2.97 g
  • Fibermore is better
    0 g
    0 g
  • Total sugarsless is better
    WIN0 g
    1.17 g
  • Total fat
    17.56 g
    28.1 g
  • Saturated fatless is better
    WIN6.91 g
    11.46 g
  • Sodiumless is better
    WIN48 mg
    865 mg
  • Potassiummore is better
    235 mg
    364 mgWIN
  • Calciummore is better
    WIN17 mg
    14 mg
  • Ironmore is better
    WIN2.38 mg
    1.12 mg
  • Magnesiummore is better
    WIN19 mg
    11 mg
  • Vitamin Cmore is better
    0 mg
    0 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.

Beef chuck roast, cooked vs Beef frankfurter (hot dog) · Foodatron