Ever wonder how your favorite foods stack up against each other in terms of nutrition?
We compared the nutritional contents of
canned tuna
versus
cooked
chicken
(100g each)
below using 2020 USDA and NIH data[1].
For a quick recap of significant nutrients and differences in canned tuna and chicken:
Both chicken and canned tuna are high in calories. Chicken has 48% more calories than canned tuna - chicken has 189 calories per 100 grams and canned tuna has 128 calories.
For macronutrient ratios, canned tuna is much heavier in protein, much lighter in fat and similar to chicken for carbs. Canned tuna has a macronutrient ratio of 78:0:22 and for chicken, 49:0:51 for protein, carbohydrates and fat from calories.
Macro Ratios from Calories:
Canned Tuna | Chicken | |
---|---|---|
Protein | 78% | 49% |
Carbohydrates | ~ | ~ |
Fat | 22% | 51% |
Alcohol | ~ | ~ |
Both chicken and canned tuna are high in protein. Chicken is very similar to chicken for protein - chicken has 23.3g of protein per 100 grams and canned tuna has 23.6g of protein.
Canned tuna has 75% less saturated fat than chicken - chicken has 3.1g of saturated fat per 100 grams and canned tuna has 0.79g of saturated fat.
Both chicken and canned tuna are low in trans fat - chicken has 0.09g of trans fat per 100 grams and canned tuna does not contain significant amounts.
Canned tuna has 61% less cholesterol than chicken - chicken has 107mg of cholesterol per 100 grams and canned tuna has 42mg of cholesterol.
Canned tuna has more Vitamin A than chicken - canned tuna has 6ug of Vitamin A per 100 grams and chicken does not contain significant amounts.
Chicken has more Vitamin E than canned tuna - chicken has 0.39mg of Vitamin E per 100 grams and canned tuna does not contain significant amounts.
Chicken and canned tuna contain similar amounts of Vitamin K - chicken has 2.1ug of Vitamin K per 100 grams and canned tuna does not contain significant amounts.
Chicken has more thiamin, riboflavin, pantothenic acid and Vitamin B6, however, canned tuna contains more Vitamin B12. Both canned tuna and chicken contain significant amounts of niacin and folate.
Canned Tuna | Chicken | |
---|---|---|
Thiamin | 0.008 MG | 0.121 MG |
Riboflavin | 0.044 MG | 0.302 MG |
Niacin | 5.799 MG | 7.107 MG |
Pantothenic acid | 0.124 MG | 1.327 MG |
Vitamin B6 | 0.217 MG | 0.538 MG |
Folate | 2 UG | 2 UG |
Vitamin B12 | 1.17 UG | 0.51 UG |
Chicken and canned tuna contain similar amounts of calcium - chicken has 8mg of calcium per 100 grams and canned tuna has 14mg of calcium.
Chicken and canned tuna contain similar amounts of iron - chicken has 0.93mg of iron per 100 grams and canned tuna has 0.97mg of iron.
Both chicken and canned tuna are high in potassium. Chicken has 186% more potassium than canned tuna - chicken has 677mg of potassium per 100 grams and canned tuna has 237mg of potassium.
For omega-3 fatty acids, canned tuna has more DHA and EPA than chicken per 100 grams. Both canned tuna and chicken contain significant amounts of alpha linoleic acid (ALA) and DPA.
Canned Tuna | Chicken | |
---|---|---|
alpha linoleic acid | 0.071 G | 0.1 G |
DHA | 0.629 G | 0.031 G |
EPA | 0.233 G | 0.008 G |
DPA | 0.018 G | 0.016 G |
Total | 0.951 G | 0.155 G |
Comparing omega-6 fatty acids, chicken has more linoleic acid than canned tuna per 100 grams.
Canned Tuna | Chicken | |
---|---|---|
linoleic acid | 0.055 G | 1.818 G |
other omega 6 | ~ | 0.02 G |
Total | 0.055 G | 1.838 G |
The comparison below is by common portions, e.g. cups, packages. You can also see a more concrete comparison by weight at equal weight (by grams) comparison.
Note: The specific food items compared are: Canned Tuna (Fish, tuna, white, canned in water, without salt, drained solids) and Chicken (Chicken, ground, crumbles, cooked, pan-browned) .
Canned Tuna 172g
(
can
)
|
Daily Values (%) |
Cooked Chicken 454g
(
lb
)
|
|||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
220KCAL 11% |
|
5% | calories | 290% |
|
857KCAL 43% | |
5.1G 8% |
|
5% | total fat | 880% |
|
50G 77% | |
1.4G 8% |
|
5% | saturated fat | 900% |
|
14G 78% | |
1.3G | 5% | monounsaturated fat | >999% | 22G | |||
1.9G | 5% | polyunsaturated fat | 395% | 9.4G | |||
5% | trans fat | >999% | 0.39G | ||||
72MG | 5% | cholesterol | 574% | 485MG | |||
86MG 6% |
|
5% | sodium | 295% |
|
340MG 23% | |
5% | Vitamins and Minerals | 5% | |||||
10UG 2% |
|
>999% | Vitamin A | 5% |
|
||
24MG 2% |
|
5% | calcium | 50% |
|
36MG 4% | |
1.7MG 9% |
|
5% | iron | 147% |
|
4.2MG 23% | |
57MG 18% |
|
5% | magnesium | 123% |
|
127MG 41% | |
408MG 18% |
|
5% | potassium | 653% |
|
3071MG 134% | |
0.01MG 1% |
|
5% | thiamin (Vit B1) | >999% |
|
0.55MG 50% | |
0.08MG 7% |
|
5% | riboflavin (Vit B2) | >999% |
|
1.4MG 125% | |
10MG 71% |
|
5% | niacin (Vit B3) | 220% |
|
32MG 230% | |
0.37MG 29% |
|
5% | Vitamin B6 | 549% |
|
2.4MG 188% | |
0.21MG 4% |
|
5% | pantothenic acid (Vit B5) | >999% |
|
6MG 120% | |
3.4UG 1% |
|
5% | folate (Vit B9) | 168% |
|
9.1UG 2% | |
2UG 84% |
|
5% | Vitamin B12 | 15% |
|
2.3UG 96% | |
|
5% | Vitamin E | >999% |
|
1.8MG 12% | ||
|
5% | Vitamin K | >999% |
|
9.5UG 11% | ||
41G 81% |
|
5% | protein | 159% |
|
106G 211% | |
|
5% | choline | >999% |
|
268MG 63% | ||
0.07MG 6% |
|
5% | copper | 300% |
|
0.28MG 23% | |
0.03MG 2% |
|
5% | manganese | 133% |
|
0.07MG 4% | |
373MG 53% |
|
5% | phosphorus | 184% |
|
1061MG 152% | |
113UG 206% |
|
74% | selenium | 5% |
|
65UG 118% | |
0.83MG 10% |
|
5% | zinc | 948% |
|
8.7MG 109% | |
127G | 5% | Water | 131% | 294G | |||
NO SIGNIFICANT AMOUNTS (either food): carbohydrates, Starch, Alcohol, dietary fiber, chlorine, chromium, fluoride, iodine, molybdenum, Vitamin D, Vitamin C, biotin (Vit B7), sugar. |