Skip to content
Foodatron logoFoodatron
Chicken breast with skin, roasted
Chicken breast with skin, roasted2
VS
Emu, cooked Leader
Emu, cooked5

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

Each value is per 100 g edible portion.

The verdict

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

Pick Chicken breast with skin, roasted for more protein and more calcium.

Pick Emu, cooked for 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
    197 kcal
    163 kcal
  • Proteinmore is better
    WIN29.8 g
    28.43 g
  • Carbohydrate
    0 g
    0 g
  • Fibermore is better
    0 g
    0 g
  • Total sugarsless is better
    0 g
    0 g
  • Total fat
    7.78 g
    4.65 g
  • Saturated fatless is better
    2.19 g
    1.24 gWIN
  • Sodiumless is better
    71 mg
    65 mgWIN
  • Potassiummore is better
    245 mg
    375 mgWIN
  • Calciummore is better
    WIN14 mg
    8 mg
  • Ironmore is better
    1.07 mg
    5.01 mgWIN
  • Magnesiummore is better
    27 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 with skin, roasted vs Emu, cooked · Foodatron