Skip to content
Foodatron logoFoodatron
Beef flank steak, cooked Leader
Beef flank steak, cooked6
VS
Beef pastrami
Beef pastrami3

Beef flank steak, cooked leads 6–3 · 9 categories decided · 1 tie

Beef flank steak, cooked: 100 g · Beef pastrami: 100 g.

The verdict

Beef flank steak, cooked comes out ahead, winning 6 of 9 nutrient match-ups.

Pick Beef flank steak, cooked for more protein, less sugar, less sodium, more potassium, more calcium and more magnesium.

Pick Beef pastrami for less saturated fat, more iron and more vitamin C.

Evenly matched on fiber.

Equal weight (per 100 g)Common servingEqual calories

Head-to-head

  • Energy
    202 kcal
    147 kcal
  • Proteinmore is better
    WIN27.55 g
    21.8 g
  • Carbohydrate
    0 g
    0.36 g
  • Fibermore is better
    0 g
    0 g
  • Total sugarsless is better
    WIN0 g
    0.1 g
  • Total fat
    9.31 g
    5.82 g
  • Saturated fatless is better
    3.84 g
    2.68 gWIN
  • Sodiumless is better
    WIN53 mg
    1078 mg
  • Potassiummore is better
    WIN326 mg
    210 mg
  • Calciummore is better
    WIN18 mg
    10 mg
  • Ironmore is better
    1.8 mg
    2.22 mgWIN
  • Magnesiummore is better
    WIN22 mg
    17 mg
  • Vitamin Cmore is better
    0 mg
    0.3 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 flank steak, cooked vs Beef pastrami · Foodatron