Compare foods

Fish, cusk, raw vs Turtle, green, raw

Original comparison by NutriVerdict

Bottom line: Turtle, green, raw is the more nutrient-dense of the two, scoring 86 of 100 to 84 for Fish, cusk, raw.

Green turtle scores higher on nutrient density, 86 of 100 against raw cusk's 84 of 100, though the two share nearly the same calorie count, 89 for turtle versus 87 for cusk. Turtle also has a slight protein edge, 19.8 g per 100 g compared to cusk's 19 g. Sodium tells the opposite story: cusk is far lower at 31 mg per 100 g, versus 68 mg for turtle.

Choose turtle when the higher overall score and marginally more protein matter most. Choose cusk when minimizing sodium is the priority, since it comes in at less than half of turtle's level. Both are essentially carb-free and fiber-free, so this pairing is really a trade of a slightly better score for a meaningfully lower sodium count.

Head to head, per 100 g

MetricFish, cuskTurtle, green
Nutrient Density Score8486
Calories87 kcal89 kcal
Protein19 g20 g
Carbohydrate0 g0 g
Dietary fiber0 g0 g
Sugars-0 g
Total fat0.7 g0.5 g
Saturated fat0.1 g0.1 g
Sodium31 mg68 mg
Potassium392 mg230 mg
Calcium10 mg118 mg
Iron0.8 mg1.4 mg
Magnesium31 mg20 mg
Vitamin C0 mg0 mg
Vitamin A18 ug30 ug
Vitamin E-0.5 mg
Cholesterol41 mg50 mg

Source: USDA FoodData Central · Public domain

Frequently asked questions

Is Turtle, green, raw healthier than Fish, cusk, raw?

On our Nutrient Density Score, which measures beneficial nutrients per calorie, Turtle, green, raw scores higher, 86 of 100 to 84. Both can fit a balanced diet; the score reflects nutrients per calorie, not a whole-diet judgement.

Which has more protein, Fish, cusk, raw or Turtle, green, raw?

Turtle, green, raw has more protein, 19.8 g per 100 g to 19 g.

Which has fewer calories?

Fish, cusk, raw is lower in calories, 87 kcal per 100 g to 89 kcal.

Full Fish, cusk profile Full Turtle, green profile