Salmon vs Tuna – Which is Healthier?

Our Verdict

When comparing salmon to tuna, we picked the tuna.

Why?

It’s close, and there are merits and drawbacks to both!

In terms of macros, tuna is higher in protein, while salmon is higher in fats. How healthy are the fats, you ask? Well, it’s a mix, because while there are plenty of “good” fats in salmon, salmon is also 10x higher in saturated fat and 150% higher in cholesterol.

So when it comes to fats, if you want to eat fish and have the healthiest fats, one option is to skip the salmon, and instead serve tuna with some extra virgin olive oil.

We’ll call this section a clear win for tuna.

On the vitamin front, they are close to equal. Salmon has more of some vitamins, tuna has more of others; all in all we’d say the balance is in salmon’s favor, but by the time a portion of salmon is giving you 350% of your daily requirement, does it really matter that the same portion of tuna is “only” giving you 294% of the daily requirement? It goes like that for a lot of the vitamins they both contain.

Still, we’ll call this section a nominal win for salmon.

In the category of minerals, tuna is much higher in iron while salmon is higher in calcium. The rest of the minerals they both have, tuna is comfortably higher—and since the “% of RDA in a portion” figures are double-digit here rather than triple, those margins are relevant this time.

We’ll call this section a moderate win for tuna.

Both fish carry a risk of mercury poisoning, but this varies more by location than by fish, so it hasn’t been a consideration in this head-to-head.

Totting up the sections, this a modest but clear win for tuna.

Want to learn more?

You might like to read:

Farmed Fish vs Wild-Caught: Important Differences!

Take care!