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

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

Both foods compared at 100 kcal.

The verdict

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

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

Pick Sea bass, cooked for more protein, 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
    100 kcal
    100 kcal
  • Proteinmore is better
    16.16 g
    19.06 gWIN
  • Carbohydrate
    0 g
    0 g
  • Fibermore is better
    0 g
    0 g
  • Total sugarsless is better
    —
    —
  • Total fat
    3.42 g
    2.06 g
  • Saturated fatless is better
    0.74 g
    0.53 gWIN
  • Sodiumless is better
    WIN48.43 mg
    70.16 mg
  • Potassiummore is better
    WIN300 mg
    264.52 mg
  • Calciummore is better
    5.66 mg
    10.48 mgWIN
  • Ironmore is better
    WIN0.39 mg
    0.3 mg
  • Magnesiummore is better
    26.42 mg
    42.74 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