Poha vs Upma
Both sides computed from the same table, at the serving each is actually eaten in.
Per 100 g, poha is heavier — 190 kcal against 112 kcal for upma, about 70% more. Per real serving the picture changes: 1 plate of poha is 304 kcal, while 1 plate of upma is 224 kcal, because the portions are not the same size. On protein, poha wins with 5.0 g per 100 g.
Side by side
| Poha | Upma | |
|---|---|---|
| Serving assumed | 1 plate · 160 g | 1 plate · 200 g |
| Calories per serving | 304 | 224 |
| Calories per 100 g | 190 | 112 |
| Protein per 100 g | 5.0 g | 2.5 g |
| Carbs per 100 g | 22.0 g | 13.6 g |
| Fat per 100 g | 9.0 g | 5.3 g |
| Fibre per 100 g | 3.5 g | 2.7 g |
| Walking to burn one serving | 71 min | 52 min |
How to read this
Per-100 g comparisons flatter whatever is eaten in small portions. Poha is denser per gram, but people do not eat by the gram — poha arrives as 1 plate and upma as 1 plate, and that is where the real difference shows up.
Poha carries more protein, which matters more than the calorie gap if you are trying to stay full. Both figures assume home cooking with a measured amount of oil; a restaurant plate of either can run 30 to 60% higher.
Nutrient values are averages for the stated preparation, based on the Indian Food Composition Tables 2017 (ICMR–NIN) and standard recipe analysis. Energy is reconciled against the macronutrients with Atwater factors on every build. General information only — not medical or nutrition advice. Home-cooked Indian food varies enormously with oil, ghee and portion size; every value here is an average for a stated serving, with the assumption shown.