Skip to content
Foodatron logoFoodatron
Bluefin tuna, cooked Leader
Bluefin tuna, cooked4
VS
Caviar (fish roe)
Caviar (fish roe)3

Bluefin tuna, cooked leads 4–3 · 7 categories decided · 2 ties

Each value is per 100 g edible portion.

The verdict

Bluefin tuna, cooked comes out ahead, winning 4 of 7 nutrient match-ups.

Pick Bluefin tuna, cooked for more protein, less saturated fat, less sodium and more potassium.

Pick Caviar (fish roe) for more calcium, more iron and more magnesium.

Evenly matched on fiber and vitamin C.

Equal weight (per 100 g)Common servingEqual calories

Head-to-head

  • Energy
    184 kcal
    264 kcal
  • Proteinmore is better
    WIN29.91 g
    24.6 g
  • Carbohydrate
    0 g
    4 g
  • Fibermore is better
    0 g
    0 g
  • Total sugarsless is better
    —
    0 g
  • Total fat
    6.28 g
    17.9 g
  • Saturated fatless is better
    WIN1.61 g
    4.06 g
  • Sodiumless is better
    WIN50 mg
    1500 mg
  • Potassiummore is better
    WIN323 mg
    181 mg
  • Calciummore is better
    10 mg
    275 mgWIN
  • Ironmore is better
    1.31 mg
    11.88 mgWIN
  • Magnesiummore is better
    64 mg
    300 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.

Bluefin tuna, cooked vs Caviar (fish roe) · Foodatron