Skip to content
Foodatron logoFoodatron
Bluefish, cooked
Bluefish, cooked1
VS
Chinook salmon, cooked Leader
Chinook salmon, cooked7

Chinook salmon, cooked leads 7–1 · 8 categories decided · 1 tie

Each value is per 100 g edible portion.

The verdict

Chinook salmon, cooked comes out ahead, winning 7 of 8 nutrient match-ups.

Pick Bluefish, cooked for less saturated fat.

Pick Chinook salmon, cooked for more protein, less sodium, more potassium, more calcium, more iron, more magnesium and more vitamin C.

Evenly matched on fiber.

Equal weight (per 100 g)Common servingEqual calories

Head-to-head

  • Energy
    159 kcal
    231 kcal
  • Proteinmore is better
    25.69 g
    25.72 gWIN
  • Carbohydrate
    0 g
    0 g
  • Fibermore is better
    0 g
    0 g
  • Total sugarsless is better
    —
    —
  • Total fat
    5.44 g
    13.38 g
  • Saturated fatless is better
    WIN1.17 g
    3.21 g
  • Sodiumless is better
    77 mg
    60 mgWIN
  • Potassiummore is better
    477 mg
    505 mgWIN
  • Calciummore is better
    9 mg
    28 mgWIN
  • Ironmore is better
    0.62 mg
    0.91 mgWIN
  • Magnesiummore is better
    42 mg
    122 mgWIN
  • 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.

Bluefish, cooked vs Chinook salmon, cooked · Foodatron