Orange roughy vs. Sucker fish — In-Depth Nutrition Comparison
Compare
How are orange roughy and sucker fish different?
- Orange roughy is higher in selenium; however, sucker fish is richer in vitamin B12, manganese, phosphorus, copper, vitamin B5, vitamin B6, potassium, and calcium.
- Daily need coverage for selenium for orange roughy is 131% higher.
- Orange roughy contains 2 times more cholesterol than sucker fish. While orange roughy contains 80mg of cholesterol, sucker fish contains only 53mg.
Fish, roughy, orange, cooked, dry heat and Fish, sucker, white, cooked, dry heat are the varieties used in this article.
Infographic
Infographic link
Mineral Comparison
Mineral comparison score is based on the number of minerals by which one or the other food is richer. The "coverage" charts below show how much of the daily needs can be covered by 300 grams of the food.
| Contains more SeleniumSelenium | +445.1% |
| Contains more MagnesiumMagnesium | +111.1% |
| Contains more CalciumCalcium | +718.2% |
| Contains more PotassiumPotassium | +169.1% |
| Contains more IronIron | +47.8% |
| Contains more CopperCopper | +233.3% |
| Contains more ZincZinc | +200% |
| Contains more PhosphorusPhosphorus | +163.7% |
| Contains less SodiumSodium | -26.1% |
| Contains more ManganeseManganese | +1978.4% |
Vitamin Comparison
Vitamin comparison score is based on the number of vitamins by which one or the other food is richer. The "coverage" charts below show how much of the daily needs can be covered by 300 grams of the food.
| Contains more Vitamin EVitamin E | +∞% |
| Contains more Vitamin B1Vitamin B1 | +275% |
| Contains more Vitamin B3Vitamin B3 | +24.5% |
| Contains more Vitamin KVitamin K | +∞% |
| Contains more Vitamin AVitamin A | +145.8% |
| Contains more Vitamin B2Vitamin B2 | +34.9% |
| Contains more Vitamin B5Vitamin B5 | +1444.6% |
| Contains more Vitamin B6Vitamin B6 | +244.8% |
| Contains more Vitamin B12Vitamin B12 | +391.5% |
| Contains more FolateFolate | +240% |
Macronutrient Comparison
Macronutrient breakdown side-by-side comparison
Protein:
22.64 g
Fats:
0.9 g
Carbs:
0 g
Water:
66.97 g
Other:
9.49 g
Protein:
21.49 g
Fats:
2.97 g
Carbs:
0 g
Water:
73.99 g
Other:
1.55 g
| Contains more OtherOther | +512.3% |
| Contains more FatsFats | +230% |
| Contains more WaterWater | +10.5% |
~equal in
Protein
~21.49g
~equal in
Carbs
~0g
Fat Type Comparison
Fat type breakdown side-by-side comparison
Saturated fat:
Sat. Fat
0.034 g
Monounsaturated fat:
Mono. Fat
0.439 g
Polyunsaturated fat:
Poly. Fat
0.184 g
Saturated fat:
Sat. Fat
0.579 g
Monounsaturated fat:
Mono. Fat
0.905 g
Polyunsaturated fat:
Poly. Fat
1.035 g
| Contains less Sat. FatSaturated fat | -94.1% |
| Contains more Mono. FatMonounsaturated fat | +106.2% |
| Contains more Poly. FatPolyunsaturated fat | +462.5% |
Comparison summary table
Pay attention to the rightmost column. It displays the amounts side by side, giving a clearer understanding of the difference.
 |
 |
||
| Lower in Cholesterol |
|
||
| Lower in Sugar |
|
||
| Lower in Sodium |
|
||
| Rich in minerals |
|
||
| Lower in Saturated fat |
|
||
| Lower in Glycemic Index | Equal | ||
| Lower in price | Equal | ||
| Rich in vitamins | Equal | ||
All nutrients comparison - raw data values
| Nutrient | |
|
DV% diff. |
| Selenium | 88.3µg | 16.2µg | 131% |
| Vitamin B12 | 0.47µg | 2.31µg | 77% |
| Manganese | 0.037mg | 0.769mg | 32% |
| Phosphorus | 102mg | 269mg | 24% |
| Copper | 0.075mg | 0.25mg | 19% |
| Vitamin B5 | 0.056mg | 0.865mg | 16% |
| Vitamin B6 | 0.067mg | 0.231mg | 13% |
| Vitamin E | 1.87mg | 12% | |
| Cholesterol | 80mg | 53mg | 9% |
| Potassium | 181mg | 487mg | 9% |
| Calcium | 11mg | 90mg | 8% |
| Iron | 1.13mg | 1.67mg | 7% |
| Zinc | 0.32mg | 0.96mg | 6% |
| Polyunsaturated fat | 0.184g | 1.035g | 6% |
| Magnesium | 18mg | 38mg | 5% |
| Vitamin A | 24µg | 59µg | 4% |
| Vitamin B1 | 0.045mg | 0.012mg | 3% |
| Fats | 0.9g | 2.97g | 3% |
| Folate | 5µg | 17µg | 3% |
| Vitamin B2 | 0.063mg | 0.085mg | 2% |
| Vitamin B3 | 1.82mg | 1.462mg | 2% |
| Saturated fat | 0.034g | 0.579g | 2% |
| Protein | 22.64g | 21.49g | 2% |
| Monounsaturated fat | 0.439g | 0.905g | 1% |
| Calories | 105kcal | 119kcal | 1% |
| Vitamin K | 1.1µg | 1% | |
| Sodium | 69mg | 51mg | 1% |
| Tryptophan | 0.23mg | 0.241mg | 0% |
| Threonine | 1.03mg | 0.942mg | 0% |
| Isoleucine | 1.058mg | 0.99mg | 0% |
| Leucine | 1.797mg | 1.746mg | 0% |
| Lysine | 2.092mg | 1.973mg | 0% |
| Methionine | 0.728mg | 0.636mg | 0% |
| Phenylalanine | 0.869mg | 0.839mg | 0% |
| Valine | 1.083mg | 1.107mg | 0% |
| Histidine | 0.474mg | 0.633mg | 0% |
| Omega-3 - EPA | 0.006g | 0.244g | N/A |
| Omega-3 - DHA | 0.025g | 0.371g | N/A |
| Omega-3 - DPA | 0.001g | 0.094g | N/A |
| Omega-6 - Eicosadienoic acid | 0.069g | N/A |
Which food is preferable for your diet?
is better in case of low diet
|
|
|
| Low Calories diet |
|
|
| Low Fats diet |
|
|
| Low Carbs diet | Equal | |
| Low Glycemic Index diet | Equal | |
People also compare
Vitamins & Minerals Daily Need Coverage Score
The summary scores indicate the extent to which this food can fulfill your daily vitamin and mineral requirements if you consume 3 servings, consisting of 100 grams of each (an approximation of 3 serving sizes).
Vitamins Daily Need Coverage Score
15%
37%
Minerals Daily Need Coverage Score
65%
58%
Comparison summary
Which food is lower in Cholesterol?
Sucker fish is lower in Cholesterol (difference - 27mg)
Which food is lower in Sugar?
Sucker fish is lower in Sugar (difference - 0g)
Which food contains less Sodium?
Sucker fish contains less Sodium (difference - 18mg)
Which food is richer in minerals?
Sucker fish is relatively richer in minerals
Which food is lower in Saturated fat?
Orange roughy is lower in Saturated fat (difference - 0.545g)
Which food is lower in glycemic index?
?
The foods have equal glycemic indexes (0)
Which food is cheaper?
?
The foods are relatively equal in price ($)
Which food is richer in vitamins?
?
It cannot be stated which food is richer in vitamins. See the charts below for detailed information. See the charts below for detailed information. See the charts below for detailed information.