Skip to content
Foodatron logoFoodatron
Chicken back, cooked
Chicken back, cooked1
VS
Emu, cooked Leader
Emu, cooked6

Emu, cooked leads 6–1 · 7 categories decided · 3 ties

Chicken back, cooked: 100 g · Emu, cooked: 100 g.

The verdict

Emu, cooked comes out ahead, winning 6 of 7 nutrient match-ups.

Pick Chicken back, cooked for more calcium.

Pick Emu, cooked for more protein, less saturated fat, less sodium, more potassium, more iron and more magnesium.

Evenly matched on fiber, sugar and vitamin C.

Equal weight (per 100 g)Common servingEqual calories

Head-to-head

  • Energy
    239 kcal
    163 kcal
  • Proteinmore is better
    28.19 g
    28.43 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
    4.65 g
  • Saturated fatless is better
    3.6 g
    1.24 gWIN
  • Sodiumless is better
    96 mg
    65 mgWIN
  • Potassiummore is better
    237 mg
    375 mgWIN
  • Calciummore is better
    WIN24 mg
    8 mg
  • Ironmore is better
    1.39 mg
    5.01 mgWIN
  • Magnesiummore is better
    22 mg
    29 mgWIN
  • 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 Emu, cooked · Foodatron