Skip to content
Foodatron logoFoodatron
Bluefish, cooked
Bluefish, cooked0
VS
Skipjack tuna, cooked Leader
Skipjack tuna, cooked8

Skipjack tuna, cooked leads 8–0 · 8 categories decided · 1 tie

Both foods compared at 100 kcal.

The verdict

Skipjack tuna, cooked comes out ahead, winning 8 of 8 nutrient match-ups.

Pick Skipjack tuna, cooked for more protein, less saturated fat, 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
    100 kcal
    100 kcal
  • Proteinmore is better
    16.16 g
    21.37 gWIN
  • Carbohydrate
    0 g
    0 g
  • Fibermore is better
    0 g
    0 g
  • Total sugarsless is better
    —
    —
  • Total fat
    3.42 g
    0.98 g
  • Saturated fatless is better
    0.74 g
    0.32 gWIN
  • Sodiumless is better
    48.43 mg
    35.61 mgWIN
  • Potassiummore is better
    300 mg
    395.45 mgWIN
  • Calciummore is better
    5.66 mg
    28.03 mgWIN
  • Ironmore is better
    0.39 mg
    1.21 mgWIN
  • Magnesiummore is better
    26.42 mg
    33.33 mgWIN
  • Vitamin Cmore is better
    0 mg
    0.76 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 Skipjack tuna, cooked · Foodatron