Canned Tuna (in water)
26.0gprotein / 100g116 cal · 0.8g fat · $ · Quality 0.9
Ground Beef (93/7 lean)
22.0gprotein / 100g152 cal · 8.0g fat · $ · Quality 0.92
Canned Tuna (in water) delivers a clearly higher protein density than Ground Beef (93/7 lean) — 26.0g vs 22.0g per 100g, a gap of 4.0g that adds up fast across multiple servings.
Neither has a meaningful edge on protein quality; they're close enough on amino acid profile that it isn't a differentiator here.
Cost is roughly comparable between the two ($), so budget isn't the deciding factor here.
Canned Tuna (in water)'s typical serving also delivers more leucine (2100mg vs Ground Beef (93/7 lean)'s 1750mg) — relevant if the goal is maximizing the muscle-protein-synthesis trigger per meal, not just total grams.
These two are closer than the comparison headline suggests. Either Canned Tuna (in water) or Ground Beef (93/7 lean) works well in most contexts — let cost, prep time, and personal preference decide rather than the macros.
Full nutrition comparison
| Per 100g | Canned Tuna (in water) | Ground Beef (93/7 lean) |
|---|---|---|
| Protein | 26.0g | 22.0g |
| Calories | 116 | 152 |
| Fat | 0.8g | 8.0g |
| Carbs | 0.0g | 0.0g |
| Fiber | 0.0g | 0.0g |
| Quality score | 0.9 | 0.92 |
| Relative cost | $ | $ |
| Prep time | 1 min | 10 min |
Frequently asked
Which has more protein, canned tuna (in water) or ground beef (93/7 lean)?
Canned Tuna (in water) has 26.0g of protein per 100g compared to Ground Beef (93/7 lean)'s 22.0g.
Which is lower in calories?
Canned Tuna (in water) is lower in calories per 100g, at 116 vs the other's 152.