Compare foods

Emu, inside drum, raw vs Ostrich, fan, raw

Original comparison by NutriVerdict

Bottom line: Emu, inside drum, raw is the more nutrient-dense of the two, scoring 86 of 100 to 82 for Ostrich, fan, raw.

Emu inside drum is the more nutrient-dense choice, scoring 86 of 100 against ostrich fan's 82 of 100. Per 100 g, emu inside drum has fewer calories (108 vs 117) and less fat (1.49 g vs 2.65 g), with protein slightly higher too (22.2 g vs 21.8 g). It does run higher in sodium, though, 102 mg versus ostrich fan's 75 mg.

Choose emu inside drum when minimizing fat and calories matters most, since it comes in lower on both while still edging out ostrich fan on protein. Choose ostrich fan when sodium needs to stay as low as possible, since it undercuts emu by 27 mg per 100 g. The 4-point score gap favors emu overall, but ostrich's lower sodium is worth noting.

Head to head, per 100 g

MetricEmu, inside drumOstrich, fan
Nutrient Density Score8682
Calories108 kcal117 kcal
Protein22 g22 g
Carbohydrate0 g0 g
Dietary fiber0 g0 g
Sugars0 g0 g
Total fat1.5 g2.7 g
Saturated fat0.4 g1 g
Sodium102 mg75 mg
Potassium318 mg308 mg
Calcium4 mg6 mg
Iron5.2 mg4.4 mg
Magnesium26 mg22 mg
Vitamin C0 mg0 mg
Vitamin A5 ug0 ug
Vitamin E0.2 mg0.2 mg
Cholesterol67 mg73 mg

Source: USDA FoodData Central · Public domain

Frequently asked questions

Is Emu, inside drum, raw healthier than Ostrich, fan, raw?

On our Nutrient Density Score, which measures beneficial nutrients per calorie, Emu, inside drum, raw scores higher, 86 of 100 to 82. Both can fit a balanced diet; the score reflects nutrients per calorie, not a whole-diet judgement.

Which has more protein, Emu, inside drum, raw or Ostrich, fan, raw?

Emu, inside drum, raw has more protein, 22.2 g per 100 g to 21.8 g.

Which has fewer calories?

Emu, inside drum, raw is lower in calories, 108 kcal per 100 g to 117 kcal.

Full Emu, inside drum profile Full Ostrich, fan profile