Skip to content
Foodatron logoFoodatron
Beef chuck roast, cooked
Beef chuck roast, cooked4
VS
Beef liver, raw
Beef liver, raw4

Dead heat · 8 categories decided · 2 ties

Each value is per 100 g edible portion.

The verdict

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

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

Pick Beef liver, raw for less saturated fat, more potassium, more iron and more vitamin C.

Evenly matched on fiber and sugar.

Equal weight (per 100 g)Common servingEqual calories

Head-to-head

  • Energy
    283 kcal
    135 kcal
  • Proteinmore is better
    WIN29.23 g
    20.36 g
  • Carbohydrate
    0 g
    3.89 g
  • Fibermore is better
    0 g
    0 g
  • Total sugarsless is better
    0 g
    0 g
  • Total fat
    17.56 g
    3.63 g
  • Saturated fatless is better
    6.91 g
    1.23 gWIN
  • Sodiumless is better
    WIN48 mg
    69 mg
  • Potassiummore is better
    235 mg
    313 mgWIN
  • Calciummore is better
    WIN17 mg
    5 mg
  • Ironmore is better
    2.38 mg
    4.9 mgWIN
  • Magnesiummore is better
    WIN19 mg
    18 mg
  • Vitamin Cmore is better
    0 mg
    1.3 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, raw · Foodatron