Is Salmon Healthier Than Tuna?

Short answer: For omega-3, clearly salmon: about 2,100 mg EPA+DHA per 100 g versus roughly 270 mg in canned tuna. Tuna is leaner and cheaper, with more protein per calorie. Both are good fish — salmon for omega-3, tuna for lean protein.

Nutrition side by side

Rounded averages from food composition tables (USDA FoodData Central and others) for the foods as eaten; brands and recipes vary.

Which wins, and when

• Less energy: Tuna — 92 kcal less per 100 g than salmon.
• More protein: Tuna — 3 g more per 100 g than salmon.
• Less saturated fat: Tuna — 2.8 g less per 100 g than salmon.
• Less salt: Salmon — 0.7 g less per 100 g than tuna.
• More omega-3: Salmon — about 2,100 mg EPA+DHA per 100 g.

In short: for fewer calories or less saturated fat, look at the “less” lines; for staying full longer, protein and fiber matter most. Goals like lower sugar, more protein or more omega-3 can be set in the diary, and swaps there are ranked for that goal.

Portion tips

• Salmon: a typical serving (fillet, 150 g) is 312 kcal — about 1 h 42 min of easy walking for a 70 kg (154 lb) person.
• Tuna: a typical serving (can, 150 g) is 174 kcal — about 57 min of easy walking.

Portion size usually moves the numbers more than the choice between two similar foods: a heaping serving of the “healthier” one can easily outweigh a modest serving of the other.

Log it and see your day

In Calories Not Count every food gets a Nutri-Score grade, a sugar–salt–fat–fiber traffic light, fair same-calorie swaps and the minutes of movement it costs for your weight and your activities — no scale needed.