Skip to content
Foodatron logoFoodatron
Beef chuck roast, cooked
Beef chuck roast, cooked3
VS
Beef liver, cooked Leader
Beef liver, cooked5

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

Beef chuck roast, cooked: 100 g · Beef liver, cooked: 100 g.

The verdict

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

Pick Beef chuck roast, cooked for more protein, less sodium and more calcium.

Pick Beef liver, 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
    283 kcal
    175 kcal
  • Proteinmore is better
    WIN29.23 g
    26.52 g
  • Carbohydrate
    0 g
    5.16 g
  • Fibermore is better
    0 g
    0 g
  • Total sugarsless is better
    0 g
    0 g
  • Total fat
    17.56 g
    4.68 g
  • Saturated fatless is better
    6.91 g
    2.53 gWIN
  • Sodiumless is better
    WIN48 mg
    77 mg
  • Potassiummore is better
    235 mg
    351 mgWIN
  • Calciummore is better
    WIN17 mg
    6 mg
  • Ironmore is better
    2.38 mg
    6.17 mgWIN
  • Magnesiummore is better
    19 mg
    22 mgWIN
  • Vitamin Cmore is better
    0 mg
    0.7 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 chuck roast, cooked vs Beef liver, cooked · Foodatron