Skip to content
Foodatron logoFoodatron
Bluefish, cooked
Bluefish, cooked3
VS
Chinook salmon, cooked Leader
Chinook salmon, cooked4

Chinook salmon, cooked leads 4–3 · 7 categories decided · 2 ties

Both foods compared at 100 kcal.

The verdict

Chinook salmon, cooked comes out ahead, winning 4 of 7 nutrient match-ups.

Pick Bluefish, cooked for more protein, less saturated fat and more potassium.

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

Evenly matched on fiber and iron.

Equal weight (per 100 g)Common servingEqual calories

Head-to-head

  • Energy
    100 kcal
    100 kcal
  • Proteinmore is better
    WIN16.16 g
    11.13 g
  • Carbohydrate
    0 g
    0 g
  • Fibermore is better
    0 g
    0 g
  • Total sugarsless is better
    —
    —
  • Total fat
    3.42 g
    5.79 g
  • Saturated fatless is better
    WIN0.74 g
    1.39 g
  • Sodiumless is better
    48.43 mg
    25.97 mgWIN
  • Potassiummore is better
    WIN300 mg
    218.61 mg
  • Calciummore is better
    5.66 mg
    12.12 mgWIN
  • Ironmore is better
    0.39 mg
    0.39 mg
  • Magnesiummore is better
    26.42 mg
    52.81 mgWIN
  • Vitamin Cmore is better
    0 mg
    1.77 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