Bluefin tuna, cooked vs Shrimp, canned

Bluefin tuna, cooked3

Leader

Shrimp, canned5

Shrimp, canned leads 5–3 · 8 categories decided · 1 tie

Both foods compared at 100 kcal.

The verdict

Shrimp, canned comes out ahead, winning 5 of 8 nutrient match-ups.

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

Pick Shrimp, canned for more protein, less saturated fat, more calcium, more iron and more vitamin C.

Evenly matched on fiber.

Equal weight (per 100 g)Common serving Equal calories

Head-to-head

Energy
100 kcal
100 kcal
Proteinmore is better
16.26 g
20.42 gWIN
Carbohydrate
0 g
0 g
Fibermore is better
0 g
0 g
Total sugarsless is better
—
0 g
Total fat
3.41 g
1.36 g
Saturated fatless is better
0.88 g
0.19 gWIN
Sodiumless is better
WIN27.17 mg
870 mg
Potassiummore is better
WIN175.54 mg
80 mg
Calciummore is better
5.43 mg
145 mgWIN
Ironmore is better
0.71 mg
2.13 mgWIN
Magnesiummore is better
WIN34.78 mg
33 mg
Vitamin Cmore is better
0 mg
4.1 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.