Skip to content
Foodatron logoFoodatron
Chicken back, cooked
Chicken back, cooked3
VS
Chicken gizzards, cooked Leader
Chicken gizzards, cooked4

Chicken gizzards, cooked leads 4–3 · 7 categories decided · 3 ties

Each value is per 100 g edible portion.

The verdict

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

Pick Chicken back, cooked for more potassium, more calcium and more magnesium.

Pick Chicken gizzards, cooked for more protein, less saturated fat, less sodium and more iron.

Evenly matched on fiber, sugar and vitamin C.

Equal weight (per 100 g)Common servingEqual calories

Head-to-head

  • Energy
    239 kcal
    154 kcal
  • Proteinmore is better
    28.19 g
    30.39 gWIN
  • Carbohydrate
    0 g
    0 g
  • Fibermore is better
    0 g
    0 g
  • Total sugarsless is better
    0 g
    0 g
  • Total fat
    13.16 g
    2.68 g
  • Saturated fatless is better
    3.6 g
    0.67 gWIN
  • Sodiumless is better
    96 mg
    56 mgWIN
  • Potassiummore is better
    WIN237 mg
    179 mg
  • Calciummore is better
    WIN24 mg
    17 mg
  • Ironmore is better
    1.39 mg
    3.19 mgWIN
  • Magnesiummore is better
    WIN22 mg
    3 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.

Chicken back, cooked vs Chicken gizzards, cooked · Foodatron