Vegetables

Cassava, raw

FDC 169985cup (206 g)

Source: USDA FoodData Central · Public domain

Original analysis by NutriVerdict

Density 56 · -37 vs Vegetables median

Raw cassava scores 56 of 100 on the Nutrient Density Score, a Fair rating, but that puts it near the bottom of the Vegetables category at rank 52 of 60, well under the group's median of 93. Its one real credential is vitamin C, at 23% DV, while most other vitamins and minerals sit modest for a root this starchy.

Cassava is a starchy root that's peeled and cooked, most often boiled, mashed, or fried in the style of a potato, and it isn't eaten raw. A cup here is a hefty 206 gram serving, reflecting its dense, filling texture, and it brings far more carbohydrate weight than the leafy or watery vegetables that dominate the top of this category. Shoppers wanting a higher-scoring pick in the same aisle might consider onions instead.

Source: USDA FoodData Central · Public domain

Fig. 1 · Macronutrient composition
Protein 1.4 g · 3%Carb 38.1 g · 95%Fat 0.3 g · 2%

Percent of calories derived by NutriVerdict from USDA grams

Nutrition facts

NutrientAmount% DV
Calories160 kcal8%
Total fat0.28 g0%
Saturated fat0.07 g0%
Cholesterol0 mg0%
Sodium14 mg1%
Carbohydrate38 g14%
Dietary fiber1.8 g6%
Sugars1.7 g
Protein1.4 g3%
Potassium271 mg6%
Calcium16 mg1%
Iron0.27 mg2%
Magnesium21 mg5%
Vitamin C21 mg23%
Vitamin A1 µg0%
Vitamin E0.19 mg1%

Source: USDA FoodData Central · Public domain

FDC 169985

Original analysis by NutriVerdict

What it is rich in

Nutrients supplying at least 10% of the Daily Value per 100 grams. 20% or more is an excellent source.

Vitamin C23% DV

Original analysis by NutriVerdict

Versus the vegetables median

Nutrient density56 vs 93 median
Protein / 100 g1.4 vs 1.7 median
Fiber / 100 g1.8 vs 2.5 median
Sodium / 100 g14 vs 22 median

Original analysis by NutriVerdict

More nutrient-dense swaps

Foods in the same category that score higher on nutrient density.

PoiDensity 61 vs 56Hearts of palm, rawDensity 63 vs 56Onions, rawDensity 67 vs 56

View the USDA source record