Skip to content
Foodatron logoFoodatron
Bluefish, cooked Leader
Bluefish, cooked4
VS
Sea bass, cooked
Sea bass, cooked3

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

Each value is per 100 g edible portion.

The verdict

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

Pick Bluefish, cooked for more protein, less sodium, more potassium and more iron.

Pick Sea bass, cooked for less saturated fat, more calcium and more magnesium.

Evenly matched on fiber and vitamin C.

Equal weight (per 100 g)Common servingEqual calories

Head-to-head

  • Energy
    159 kcal
    124 kcal
  • Proteinmore is better
    WIN25.69 g
    23.63 g
  • Carbohydrate
    0 g
    0 g
  • Fibermore is better
    0 g
    0 g
  • Total sugarsless is better
    —
    —
  • Total fat
    5.44 g
    2.56 g
  • Saturated fatless is better
    1.17 g
    0.66 gWIN
  • Sodiumless is better
    WIN77 mg
    87 mg
  • Potassiummore is better
    WIN477 mg
    328 mg
  • Calciummore is better
    9 mg
    13 mgWIN
  • Ironmore is better
    WIN0.62 mg
    0.37 mg
  • Magnesiummore is better
    42 mg
    53 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.

Bluefish, cooked vs Sea bass, cooked · Foodatron