Skip to content
Foodatron logoFoodatron
Chicken breast, raw
Chicken breast, raw2
VS
Emu, cooked Leader
Emu, cooked5

Emu, cooked leads 5–2 · 7 categories decided · 3 ties

Chicken breast, raw: 100 g · Emu, cooked: 100 g.

The verdict

Emu, cooked comes out ahead, winning 5 of 7 nutrient match-ups.

Pick Chicken breast, raw for less saturated fat and less sodium.

Pick Emu, cooked for more protein, more potassium, more calcium, 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
    120 kcal
    163 kcal
  • Proteinmore is better
    22.5 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
    2.62 g
    4.65 g
  • Saturated fatless is better
    WIN0.56 g
    1.24 g
  • Sodiumless is better
    WIN45 mg
    65 mg
  • Potassiummore is better
    334 mg
    375 mgWIN
  • Calciummore is better
    5 mg
    8 mgWIN
  • Ironmore is better
    0.37 mg
    5.01 mgWIN
  • Magnesiummore is better
    28 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 breast, raw vs Emu, cooked · Foodatron