Skip to content
Foodatron logoFoodatron
Beef flank steak, cooked
Beef flank steak, cooked3
VS
Lamb shoulder, cooked Leader
Lamb shoulder, cooked4

Lamb shoulder, cooked leads 4–3 · 7 categories decided · 2 ties

Each value is per 100 g edible portion.

The verdict

Lamb shoulder, cooked comes out ahead, winning 4 of 7 nutrient match-ups.

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

Pick Lamb shoulder, cooked for more protein, less sodium, more calcium and more iron.

Evenly matched on fiber and vitamin C.

Equal weight (per 100 g)Common servingEqual calories

Head-to-head

  • Energy
    202 kcal
    357 kcal
  • Proteinmore is better
    27.55 g
    28.21 gWIN
  • Carbohydrate
    0 g
    0 g
  • Fibermore is better
    0 g
    0 g
  • Total sugarsless is better
    0 g
    —
  • Total fat
    9.31 g
    26.27 g
  • Saturated fatless is better
    WIN3.84 g
    12.74 g
  • Sodiumless is better
    53 mg
    51 mgWIN
  • Potassiummore is better
    WIN326 mg
    147 mg
  • Calciummore is better
    18 mg
    27 mgWIN
  • Ironmore is better
    1.8 mg
    2.11 mgWIN
  • Magnesiummore is better
    WIN22 mg
    18 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 Lamb shoulder, cooked · Foodatron