Skip to content
Foodatron logoFoodatron
Beef flank steak, cooked Leader
Beef flank steak, cooked6
VS
Beef tenderloin, cooked
Beef tenderloin, cooked1

Beef flank steak, cooked leads 6–1 · 7 categories decided · 3 ties

Each value is per 100 g edible portion.

The verdict

Beef flank steak, cooked comes out ahead, winning 6 of 7 nutrient match-ups.

Pick Beef flank steak, cooked for more protein, less saturated fat, more potassium, more calcium, more iron and more magnesium.

Pick Beef tenderloin, cooked for less sodium.

Evenly matched on fiber, sugar and vitamin C.

Equal weight (per 100 g)Common servingEqual calories

Head-to-head

  • Energy
    202 kcal
    273 kcal
  • Proteinmore is better
    WIN27.55 g
    26.43 g
  • Carbohydrate
    0 g
    0 g
  • Fibermore is better
    0 g
    0 g
  • Total sugarsless is better
    0 g
    0 g
  • Total fat
    9.31 g
    17.78 g
  • Saturated fatless is better
    WIN3.84 g
    7 g
  • Sodiumless is better
    53 mg
    52 mgWIN
  • Potassiummore is better
    WIN326 mg
    318 mg
  • Calciummore is better
    WIN18 mg
    17 mg
  • Ironmore is better
    WIN1.8 mg
    1.76 mg
  • Magnesiummore is better
    WIN22 mg
    21 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 flank steak, cooked vs Beef tenderloin, cooked · Foodatron