Compare foods

Fish, burbot, raw vs Fish, mahimahi, raw

Original comparison by NutriVerdict

Bottom line: Fish, mahimahi, raw is the more nutrient-dense of the two, scoring 84 of 100 to 83 for Fish, burbot, raw.

Raw mahimahi scores a point higher on nutrient density, 84 of 100 against burbot's 83 of 100, and also comes in lighter, 85 calories per 100 g versus burbot's 90. Burbot has a modest protein edge, 19.3 g compared to mahimahi's 18.5 g, but also more sodium, 97 mg versus 88 mg, and slightly more fat, 0.81 g against 0.7 g.

Choose mahimahi when fewer calories and lower sodium are the priority, since it comes out ahead on both. Choose burbot when the small protein advantage matters more than those differences. With scores this close, either works as a lean seafood choice, and the honest note is that the gaps here are small enough that either could be more relevant depending on the goal.

Head to head, per 100 g

MetricFish, burbotFish, mahimahi
Nutrient Density Score8384
Calories90 kcal85 kcal
Protein19 g19 g
Carbohydrate0 g0 g
Dietary fiber0 g0 g
Sugars--
Total fat0.8 g0.7 g
Saturated fat0.2 g0.2 g
Sodium97 mg88 mg
Potassium404 mg416 mg
Calcium50 mg15 mg
Iron0.9 mg1.1 mg
Magnesium32 mg30 mg
Vitamin C0 mg0 mg
Vitamin A5 ug54 ug
Vitamin E--
Cholesterol60 mg73 mg

Source: USDA FoodData Central · Public domain

Frequently asked questions

Is Fish, mahimahi, raw healthier than Fish, burbot, raw?

On our Nutrient Density Score, which measures beneficial nutrients per calorie, Fish, mahimahi, raw scores higher, 84 of 100 to 83. Both can fit a balanced diet; the score reflects nutrients per calorie, not a whole-diet judgement.

Which has more protein, Fish, burbot, raw or Fish, mahimahi, raw?

Fish, burbot, raw has more protein, 19.3 g per 100 g to 18.5 g.

Which has fewer calories?

Fish, mahimahi, raw is lower in calories, 85 kcal per 100 g to 90 kcal.

Full Fish, burbot profile Full Fish, mahimahi profile