Tea100 g vs 100 gTwo cited FDC recordsUpdated

Tea, iced, bottled, black: standard sugar vs decaffeinated unsweetened USDA FDC 2710527 vs 2710532

Per 100 g, standard sugar reports 9.5 g total sugars, while decaffeinated unsweetened reports 0 g total sugars.

The comparison uses two cited USDA records. Their complete source names, household portions, nutrient values, and FoodData Central links remain visible below.

Record A · FDC 2710527

Tea, iced, bottled, black

Check this record in FoodData Central ↗

Record B · FDC 2710532

Tea, iced, bottled, black, decaffeinated, unsweetened

Check this record in FoodData Central ↗

Highlighted difference

Calories at the same 100-gram weight

Bar length shows the two cited values on one shared denominator. It does not rank either food or establish why they differ.

  1. 45 kcal
  2. 1 kcal

Shared basis: 100 g · kcal

Equal-weight evidence

Nutrition per 100 grams

Both columns use the same mass, which compares nutrient concentration without allowing the two representative source amounts to change the denominator. “A +” or “B +” reports the arithmetic difference between the cited values; it is not a quality score.

On smaller screens, focus a comparison table and scroll horizontally to read every column.

Per-100-gram nutrient comparison for Tea, iced, bottled, black and Tea, iced, bottled, black, decaffeinated, unsweetened
NutrientA · Tea, iced, bottled, blackB · Tea, iced, bottled, black, decaffeinated…Difference
CaloriesMaterial difference 45 kcal 1 kcal A +44 kcal
Protein 0 g 0 g Same reported value
Total fat 0.2 g 0 g A +0.2 g
CarbohydrateMaterial difference 10.8 g 0.3 g A +10.5 g
Dietary fiber 0 g 0 g Same reported value
Total sugarsMaterial difference 9.5 g 0 g A +9.5 g
Sodium 3 mg 3 mg Same reported value
Saturated fat 0 g 0 g No difference at displayed precision
Potassium 14 mg 37 mg B +23 mg
Calcium 4 mg 0 mg A +4 mg
Iron 0 mg 0 mg No difference at displayed precision

Values come from the two cited USDA FoodData Central Survey Foods records. Feast does not average records, impute missing values, or infer a nutrient from the food name.

Read the table by question

Every material primary-nutrient difference on this page is numerically higher in A (3 of 3).

These answers describe concentration per 100 grams. “More” and “less” identify the arithmetic direction only; they do not decide which record is a better match or which food is better for a person.

Which reports fewer calories?

Record B

Record B reports 1 kcal, compared with 45 kcal in the other record—a difference of 44 kcal.

Which reports more protein?

Same reported value

Both records report 0 g of protein per 100 g.

Which reports more fiber?

Same reported value

Both records report 0 g of fiber per 100 g.

Which reports less sodium?

Same reported value

Both records report 3 mg of sodium per 100 g.

What differs in the source descriptions

The exact names carry information the numbers cannot.

USDA assigns both records to “Tea,” but the topic label is broad. Record A is “Tea, iced, bottled, black.” Record B is “Tea, iced, bottled, black, decaffeinated, unsweetened.” Feast paired them because their contrast-neutral food identities are an exact match, not merely because they share a generic category.

The controlled name parser found 2 interpretable distinctions. These labels organize wording already present in the names; they do not establish that a distinction caused a nutrient difference.

Controlled wording distinctions
Description dimensionRecord ARecord B
Sugar wordingNo matching controlled term in the source nameunsweetened
Caffeine wordingNo matching controlled term in the source namedecaffeinated

Even a clean name contrast can carry hidden companions. A fried record may also include coating; a restaurant record can use a different recipe; a reduced-sodium description can differ in more than salt; and a source amount can reflect a different reporting convention. That is why this page reports the complete pair rather than treating one word as an intervention.

Portion context

A representative source amount is not a shared “serving.”

Record A uses USDA reference amount at 360 g. Record B uses USDA reference amount at 360 g. Those labels and gram weights come from their respective records. They are useful for scaling the chosen profile, but they are not recommendations and need not describe equal amounts.

The representative amounts do not cross Feast’s material portion-difference threshold of both 15 grams and 20%. They are still separate source measures, so the 100-gram table remains the appropriate place for an equal-weight comparison.

A cup, piece, slice, sandwich, fillet, or fluid ounce can have different gram weights across records. A matching label is not enough: check the listed grams. If accuracy matters more than convenience, weighing the food or using a current package label can be more specific than a generic survey-food measure.

Record A measures

  • 1 fl oz (no ice)31 g
  • 1 fl oz (with ice)23 g
  • 1 fl oz (NFS)31 g
  • 1 can or bottle (12 fl oz)372 g
  • 1 Snapple bottle (16 fl oz)496 g
  • 1 can or bottle (16.9 fl oz)524 g
  • 1 can or bottle (20 fl oz)620 g
  • 1 child/senior drink279 g
Scale record A →

Record B measures

  • 1 fl oz (no ice)30 g
  • 1 fl oz (with ice)23 g
  • 1 fl oz (NFS)30 g
  • 1 can or bottle (12 fl oz)360 g
  • 1 can or bottle (16.9 fl oz)507 g
  • 1 can or bottle (20 fl oz)600 g
  • 1 child/senior drink270 g
  • 1 small drink360 g
Scale record B →

One shared household label

1 can or bottle (12 fl oz): 372 g in A vs 360 g in B

The household label matches, but the source gram weights differ. These values scale each record by its own listed grams; they are practical portion context, not an equal-mass comparison.

Nutrition for one 1 can or bottle (12 fl oz) using each record’s own source gram weight
NutrientA · 372 gB · 360 g
Calories167 kcal4 kcal
Protein0 g0 g
Dietary fiber0 g0 g
Sodium11 mg11 mg

USDA source formulation evidence

The listed inputs provide another way to audit the match.

FNDDS includes input-food rows behind each standardized survey-food record. Record A’s leading listed inputs include Beverages, tea, black, ready-to-drink, lemon, sweetened. Record B’s include Beverages, tea, black, brewed, prepared with tap water, decaffeinated. Ingredient-code overlap is 0%, and normalized listed-input-weight variation is 100%.

Record A · 1 coded input

Tea, iced, bottled, black

  1. Beverages, tea, black, ready-to-drink, lemon, sweetenedIngredient code 14199
    100% of listed input weight

0 shared coded inputs

The two listed formulations do not share an ingredient code in this source extract. Shared codes can still carry different listed weights.

1 A-only and 1 B-only coded inputs

A-only entries include Beverages, tea, black, ready-to-drink, lemon, sweetened. B-only entries include Beverages, tea, black, brewed, prepared with tap water, decaffeinated.

Important: repeated rows carrying the same ingredient code are combined before the shares and overlap are calculated. These weights belong to USDA’s source formulation: they are not a reconstructed plate, final cooked yield, visitor serving, ingredient declaration, or estimate of what is visible in a photo. USDA’s FNDDS documentation explains that these calculation recipes can represent multiple variants, may include retention or moisture adjustments, and are not product-label ingredient lists.

USDA shorthand in this evidence
  • NFS means “not further specified.” The record intentionally leaves the exact subtype, size, or preparation unresolved.

Choosing the closer record

Match context first; scale second.

  1. 01

    Read both names literally

    Compare cooking method, coating, edible skin or peel, sauce, additions, venue, source form, and food subtype. For this pair, the full A and B descriptions above are the evidence—not shortened search labels.

  2. 02

    Use listed inputs as a check

    If the name still leaves ambiguity, compare the leading and unique source inputs. They can reveal that two near names refer to meaningfully different standardized formulations, but they do not reconstruct your dish.

  3. 03

    Choose an amount for that record

    After choosing A or B, use its own named measure and gram weight. Do not transfer a cup, slice, or “typical amount” from the other record as if the measures were interchangeable.

  4. 04

    Account for missing details

    Brand, current restaurant recipe, cooking oil, drained weight, toppings, substitutions, and unfinished portions may not be captured. A label or weighed recipe can supersede a generic reference when it better matches the actual food.

Limits and responsible interpretation

This is a comparison of records, not a causal study.

The two records come from 2021–2023 FoodData Central Survey Foods data. The nutrient table faithfully compares their published values on the same weight basis. It does not measure two plates prepared at the same time, isolate one ingredient, or estimate the uncertainty around either value.

For this pair, the source names differ across 2 documented description dimensions, while the listed formulations show 0% ingredient-code overlap and 100% normalized listed-weight variation. Moisture, ingredient proportions, preparation, and record construction can therefore move together. The page can describe the combined record difference; it cannot isolate the effect of one word.

A higher or lower number is not an overall verdict. Protein, fiber, sodium, energy, fat, micronutrients, preferences, allergies, budget, portion, and an individual’s goals answer different questions. Feast therefore reports directions and magnitudes without applying a universal “healthier” label.

This page is educational and does not diagnose a condition, prescribe a target, or replace advice from a qualified professional. For an allergy, medically directed diet, or strict ingredient limit, use verified ingredient information and guidance appropriate to that situation.

How this page qualified

A page is published only when the pair clears materiality and diversity gates.

Both records must occupy the same USDA survey-food topic and share a close food identity after a controlled vocabulary separates preparation, edible-part, source, claim, crust, and sauce wording. Exact contrast-neutral identities receive priority. Close ingredient or form substitutions can qualify when name overlap remains high and the numerical evidence is material.

For primary nutrients, Feast requires both an absolute and relative difference: at least 20 kcal and 12% for energy; 2 g and 18% for protein or fat; 5 g and 15% for carbohydrate; 1 g and 20% for fiber; 4 g and 20% for sugars; or 100 mg and 20% for sodium. A focused one-nutrient pair also needs a material representative-amount or formulation distinction. Rounding-only pairs are not published.

Unordered FDC IDs define a canonical pair, so reversing A and B cannot create another page. Each source record can appear twice at most, each USDA topic contributes no more than 40 pages, and closely repeated identity families are capped. Those rules produced a selective comparison library rather than every mathematical combination in the corpus.

Read the complete nutrition-page methodology for import, nutrient mapping, portion scaling, Daily Value, and uncertainty rules.

Decision support from the exact records on this page

Turn source data into a better next decision

These conclusions and reading paths are computed from 2 exact records behind Tea, iced, bottled, black versus Tea, iced, bottled, black, decaffeinated, unsweetened. Links are chosen by record identity, controlled contrast, formulation input, nutrient spread, or serving context—not by loose keyword similarity.

Equal-weight result

Tea, iced, bottled, black is higher in calories per 100 g

Tea, iced, bottled, black reports 45 kcal versus 1 kcal for Tea, iced, bottled, black, decaffeinated, unsweetened: a 44 kcal difference when both are normalized to 100 g.

Inspect the underlying evidence

These listed servings have equal weights

2 listed servings each weigh 360 g

The 2 records with a listed serving weight on this page each use 360 g. Their serving totals therefore compare equal weights, even if the household labels differ. Match the preparation and adjust the weight to the amount you eat.

Record identity is part of the estimate

Distinguish “Tea, iced, bottled, black” from “Tea, iced, bottled, black, decaffeinated, unsweetened”

These are separate USDA records with separate formulations or survey descriptions. Match preparation, additions, and the named household amount before borrowing either record’s nutrients.

Inspect the underlying evidence

Contextual knowledge graph

Follow the relationship that matches your question

For Tea, iced, bottled, black versus Tea, iced, bottled, black, decaffeinated, unsweetened, each path states why the destination belongs here, so you can distinguish a true evidentiary connection from a merely similar label.

Best next guide for this exact record Tea, iced

Tea, iced, bottled, black and Tea, iced, bottled, black, decaffeinated, unsweetened are explicitly linked in this guide, which separates direct name matches from contextual variants.

Follow this evidence path
Put the observed spread in corpus context Calories: density and serving context

In this page’s records, calories runs from 1 kcal in Tea, iced, bottled, black, decaffeinated, unsweetened to 45 kcal in Tea, iced, bottled, black, all per 100 g.

Follow this evidence path
2 exact records carried forward Tea

Tea, iced, bottled, black and Tea, iced, bottled, black, decaffeinated, unsweetened are explicitly linked in this guide, which separates direct name matches from contextual variants.

Follow this evidence path
Test a nearby record choice Tea, iced, bottled, black vs Tea, iced, bottled, black, decaffeinated, diet

Tea, iced, bottled, black is held as one side of the comparison. The explicit record-description contrast is Sugar wording: No matching controlled term in the source name versus diet wording; it is a selection cue, not evidence of cause.

Follow this evidence path
A formulation detail that separates records Beverages, tea, black, brewed, prepared with tap water, decaffeinated

USDA input 14352 appears in 1 of 2 context records; its summed listed input weight spans 100–100 g across those source formulations. These are source-formulation input weights, not plated or serving weights. Follow the code to inspect every represented occurrence.

Follow this evidence path
Put the observed spread in corpus context Calcium: density and serving context

In this page’s records, calcium runs from 0 mg in Tea, iced, bottled, black, decaffeinated, unsweetened to 4 mg in Tea, iced, bottled, black, all per 100 g.

Follow this evidence path
2 context records in this source topic Tea

Tea, iced, bottled, black and Tea, iced, bottled, black, decaffeinated, unsweetened belong to this USDA source-category collection. Its displayed ranges and complete exact-record catalog provide the peer set for a manual comparison; the destination does not preselect this page’s record.

Follow this evidence path