Oats (rolled, dry)
13.2gprotein / 100g379 cal · 6.5g fat · $ · Quality 0.58
Amaranth (cooked)
4.7gprotein / 100g102 cal · 1.6g fat · $$$ · Quality 0.75
Oats (rolled, dry) is in a different weight class here, protein-wise: 13.2g per 100g vs Amaranth (cooked)'s 4.7g, a 8.5g difference that's more about food category than food quality.
Quality flips the other way, though: Amaranth (cooked) has the stronger amino acid profile (lit_estimate, near-complete pseudo-grain, higher lysine than most grains) versus Oats (rolled, dry)'s lit_estimate, low in lysine.
Budget-wise, Oats (rolled, dry) runs meaningfully cheaper per typical serving ($) than Amaranth (cooked) ($$$).
Oats (rolled, dry)'s typical serving also delivers more leucine (850mg vs Amaranth (cooked)'s 380mg) — relevant if the goal is maximizing the muscle-protein-synthesis trigger per meal, not just total grams.
If raw protein density is what you're optimizing for, Oats (rolled, dry) wins clearly. Choose Amaranth (cooked) instead if its lower fat, cost, or prep time matters more to you than the extra grams.
Full nutrition comparison
| Per 100g | Oats (rolled, dry) | Amaranth (cooked) |
|---|---|---|
| Protein | 13.2g | 4.7g |
| Calories | 379 | 102 |
| Fat | 6.5g | 1.6g |
| Carbs | 67.7g | 18.7g |
| Fiber | 10.1g | 2.1g |
| Quality score | 0.58 | 0.75 |
| Relative cost | $ | $$$ |
| Prep time | 5 min | 20 min |
Frequently asked
Which has more protein, oats (rolled, dry) or amaranth (cooked)?
Oats (rolled, dry) has 13.2g of protein per 100g compared to Amaranth (cooked)'s 4.7g.
Which is lower in calories?
Amaranth (cooked) is lower in calories per 100g, at 102 vs the other's 379.