Skip to content
Foodatron logoFoodatron
Chicken back, cooked
Chicken back, cooked4
VS
Chicken hearts, cooked
Chicken hearts, cooked4

Dead heat · 8 categories decided · 1 tie

Each value is per 100 g edible portion.

The verdict

It's a dead heat — each wins 4 of 8 match-ups.

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

Pick Chicken hearts, cooked for less saturated fat, less sodium, more iron and more vitamin C.

Evenly matched on fiber.

Equal weight (per 100 g)Common servingEqual calories

Head-to-head

  • Energy
    239 kcal
    185 kcal
  • Proteinmore is better
    WIN28.19 g
    26.41 g
  • Carbohydrate
    0 g
    0.1 g
  • Fibermore is better
    0 g
    0 g
  • Total sugarsless is better
    0 g
    —
  • Total fat
    13.16 g
    7.92 g
  • Saturated fatless is better
    3.6 g
    2.26 gWIN
  • Sodiumless is better
    96 mg
    48 mgWIN
  • Potassiummore is better
    WIN237 mg
    132 mg
  • Calciummore is better
    WIN24 mg
    19 mg
  • Ironmore is better
    1.39 mg
    9.03 mgWIN
  • Magnesiummore is better
    WIN22 mg
    20 mg
  • Vitamin Cmore is better
    0 mg
    1.8 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.

Chicken back, cooked vs Chicken hearts, cooked · Foodatron