Skip to content
Foodatron logoFoodatron
Bluefin tuna, cooked
Bluefin tuna, cooked3
VS
Clams, canned Leader
Clams, canned4

Clams, canned leads 4–3 · 7 categories decided · 2 ties

Bluefin tuna, cooked: 100 g · Clams, canned: 100 g.

The verdict

Clams, canned comes out ahead, winning 4 of 7 nutrient match-ups.

Pick Bluefin tuna, cooked for more protein, less sodium and more magnesium.

Pick Clams, canned for less saturated fat, more potassium, more calcium and more iron.

Evenly matched on fiber and vitamin C.

Equal weight (per 100 g)Common servingEqual calories

Head-to-head

  • Energy
    184 kcal
    142 kcal
  • Proteinmore is better
    WIN29.91 g
    24.25 g
  • Carbohydrate
    0 g
    5.9 g
  • Fibermore is better
    0 g
    0 g
  • Total sugarsless is better
    —
    0 g
  • Total fat
    6.28 g
    1.59 g
  • Saturated fatless is better
    1.61 g
    0.31 gWIN
  • Sodiumless is better
    WIN50 mg
    112 mg
  • Potassiummore is better
    323 mg
    628 mgWIN
  • Calciummore is better
    10 mg
    65 mgWIN
  • Ironmore is better
    1.31 mg
    2.68 mgWIN
  • Magnesiummore is better
    WIN64 mg
    32 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.

Bluefin tuna, cooked vs Clams, canned · Foodatron