Skip to content
Foodatron logoFoodatron
Bluefish, cooked
Bluefish, cooked3
VS
Canned white tuna in water Leader
Canned white tuna in water4

Canned white tuna in water leads 4–3 · 7 categories decided · 2 ties

Both foods compared at 100 kcal.

The verdict

Canned white tuna in water comes out ahead, winning 4 of 7 nutrient match-ups.

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

Pick Canned white tuna in water for more protein, less saturated fat, more calcium and more iron.

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
    18.45 gWIN
  • Carbohydrate
    0 g
    0 g
  • Fibermore is better
    0 g
    0 g
  • Total sugarsless is better
    —
    0 g
  • Total fat
    3.42 g
    2.32 g
  • Saturated fatless is better
    0.74 g
    0.62 gWIN
  • Sodiumless is better
    WIN48.43 mg
    294.53 mg
  • Potassiummore is better
    WIN300 mg
    185.16 mg
  • Calciummore is better
    5.66 mg
    10.94 mgWIN
  • Ironmore is better
    0.39 mg
    0.76 mgWIN
  • Magnesiummore is better
    WIN26.42 mg
    25.78 mg
  • 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 Canned white tuna in water · Foodatron