Side-by-side comparison

SWANSON COOKING STOCK, BEEF vs BLUE HARBOR FISH . SKINLESS & BONELESS CHUNK STYLE WILD PINK SALMON

BLUE HARBOR FISH . SKINLESS & BONELESS CHUNK STYLE WILD PINK SALMON wins by 24 points on FoodScore. Nutrient breakdown below — green values are better per field.

Verdict

FoodScore: SWANSON COOKING STOCK, BEEF scores 45/100, BLUE HARBOR FISH . SKINLESS & BONELESS CHUNK STYLE WILD PINK SALMON scores 69/100. BLUE HARBOR FISH . SKINLESS & BONELESS CHUNK STYLE WILD PINK SALMON wins by 24 points on added sugar (0g vs 0.6g per 100 g) and protein (21.4g vs 1.3g per 100 g).

0/ 100

prepared

SWANSON COOKING STOCK, BEEF

Decent · 1 cup

0/ 100

prepared

BLUE HARBOR FISH . SKINLESS & BONELESS CHUNK STYLE WILD PINK SALMON

Good · 1 CAN DRAINED

Per 100gSWANSON COOKING STOCK, BEEFBLUE HARBOR FISH . SKINLESS & BONELESS CHUNK STYLE WILD PINK SALMON

Calories8 kcal102.04 kcal

Protein1.25 g21.43 g

Fiber0 g0 g

Total fat0 g1.53 g

Saturated fat0 g0.51 g

Added sugar0.58 g0 g

Sodium207.92 mg438.78 mg

Potassium0 mg142.86 mg

Calcium8 mg0 mg

Iron0.15 mg1.47 mg

Comparison uses per-100g nutrient values from USDA FoodData Central. Each field is marked in green for the option that is healthier on that specific row — but the final FoodScore weighs all fields together plus processing level (NOVA) to produce a single 0–100 number.