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

Both foods compared at 100 kcal.

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
    100 kcal
    100 kcal
  • Proteinmore is better
    11.79 g
    17.44 gWIN
  • Carbohydrate
    0 g
    0 g
  • Fibermore is better
    0 g
    0 g
  • Total sugarsless is better
    0 g
    0 g
  • Total fat
    5.51 g
    2.85 g
  • Saturated fatless is better
    1.51 g
    0.76 gWIN
  • Sodiumless is better
    40.17 mg
    39.88 mgWIN
  • Potassiummore is better
    99.16 mg
    230.06 mgWIN
  • Calciummore is better
    WIN10.04 mg
    4.91 mg
  • Ironmore is better
    0.58 mg
    3.07 mgWIN
  • Magnesiummore is better
    9.21 mg
    17.79 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