Skip to content
Foodatron logoFoodatron
Chicken back, cooked
Chicken back, cooked1
VS
Chicken hearts, cooked Leader
Chicken hearts, cooked7

Chicken hearts, cooked leads 7–1 · 8 categories decided · 1 tie

Both foods compared at 100 kcal.

The verdict

Chicken hearts, cooked comes out ahead, winning 7 of 8 nutrient match-ups.

Pick Chicken back, cooked for more potassium.

Pick Chicken hearts, cooked for more protein, less saturated fat, less sodium, 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
    11.79 g
    14.28 gWIN
  • Carbohydrate
    0 g
    0.05 g
  • Fibermore is better
    0 g
    0 g
  • Total sugarsless is better
    0 g
    —
  • Total fat
    5.51 g
    4.28 g
  • Saturated fatless is better
    1.51 g
    1.22 gWIN
  • Sodiumless is better
    40.17 mg
    25.95 mgWIN
  • Potassiummore is better
    WIN99.16 mg
    71.35 mg
  • Calciummore is better
    10.04 mg
    10.27 mgWIN
  • Ironmore is better
    0.58 mg
    4.88 mgWIN
  • Magnesiummore is better
    9.21 mg
    10.81 mgWIN
  • Vitamin Cmore is better
    0 mg
    0.97 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