Compare foods

Emu, full rump, raw vs Emu, inside drum, raw

Original comparison by NutriVerdict

Bottom line: Emu, full rump, raw and Emu, inside drum, raw score the same on nutrient density, 86 of 100.

Emu full rump and emu inside drum score identically for nutrient density, 86 of 100 each, so the differences come down to individual numbers per 100 g. Full rump carries more calories (112 vs 108) and more fat (1.64 g vs 1.49 g), but also slightly more protein (22.8 g vs 22.2 g). Inside drum runs higher in sodium, 102 mg versus full rump's 90 mg.

Choose full rump when protein per 100 g matters most, since it edges out inside drum by 0.6 g. Choose inside drum when trimming fat and calories slightly is the goal, keeping in mind it carries more sodium than full rump. With equal scores of 86, this pairing is close nutritionally, so cut preference can decide.

Head to head, per 100 g

MetricEmu, full rumpEmu, inside drum
Nutrient Density Score8686
Calories112 kcal108 kcal
Protein23 g22 g
Carbohydrate0 g0 g
Dietary fiber0 g0 g
Sugars0 g0 g
Total fat1.6 g1.5 g
Saturated fat0.4 g0.4 g
Sodium90 mg102 mg
Potassium330 mg318 mg
Calcium4 mg4 mg
Iron5 mg5.2 mg
Magnesium40 mg26 mg
Vitamin C0 mg0 mg
Vitamin A4 ug5 ug
Vitamin E0.2 mg0.2 mg
Cholesterol85 mg67 mg

Source: USDA FoodData Central · Public domain

Frequently asked questions

Which has more protein, Emu, full rump, raw or Emu, inside drum, raw?

Emu, full rump, raw has more protein, 22.8 g per 100 g to 22.2 g.

Which has fewer calories?

Emu, inside drum, raw is lower in calories, 108 kcal per 100 g to 112 kcal.

Full Emu, full rump profile Full Emu, inside drum profile