Skip to content
Foodatron logoFoodatron
Beef flank steak, cooked Leader
Beef flank steak, cooked4
VS
Ground lamb, cooked
Ground lamb, cooked3

Beef flank steak, cooked leads 4–3 · 7 categories decided · 3 ties

Each value is per 100 g edible portion.

The verdict

Beef flank steak, cooked comes out ahead, winning 4 of 7 nutrient match-ups.

Pick Beef flank steak, cooked for more protein, less saturated fat, less sodium and more iron.

Pick Ground lamb, cooked for more potassium, more calcium and more magnesium.

Evenly matched on fiber, sugar and vitamin C.

Equal weight (per 100 g)Common servingEqual calories

Head-to-head

  • Energy
    202 kcal
    283 kcal
  • Proteinmore is better
    WIN27.55 g
    24.75 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
    19.65 g
  • Saturated fatless is better
    WIN3.84 g
    8.12 g
  • Sodiumless is better
    WIN53 mg
    81 mg
  • Potassiummore is better
    326 mg
    339 mgWIN
  • Calciummore is better
    18 mg
    22 mgWIN
  • Ironmore is better
    WIN1.8 mg
    1.79 mg
  • Magnesiummore is better
    22 mg
    24 mgWIN
  • 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 Ground lamb, cooked · Foodatron