Crab (cooked) vs Shrimp (cooked)

The short answer

Two lean, cooked shellfish, low in calories and high in protein. Crab is a touch higher in some minerals and sweeter; shrimp is leaner still and quick to cook. Near-matched — pick by the dish, the price and the sweetness you want.

Crab (cooked) and Shrimp (cooked), per 100 g and per portion. A gap means USDA has no value for it — not zero.

	Crab (cooked) · per 100 g	Shrimp (cooked) · per 100 g
Calories	110	99
Protein	22.3 g	24 g
Fat	1.2 g	0.3 g
Carbs	1 g	0.2 g
Fiber	0 g	no data
Sugars	no data	no data
Sodium	378 mg	111 mg
Vitamins & minerals — where both carry data
Calcium	59 mg	70 mg
Folate	42 µg	no data
Iron	0.4 mg	0.5 mg
Magnesium	58 mg	39 mg
Niacin	3.6 mg	no data
Phosphorus	175 mg	237 mg
Potassium	408 mg	259 mg
Riboflavin	0.2 mg	no data
Thiamin	0.1 mg	no data
Vitamin A	31 µg	no data
Vitamin B12	10.4 µg	no data
Vitamin B6	0.2 mg	no data
Vitamin C	3.6 mg	no data
Zinc	5.5 mg	1.6 mg

At equal calories (per 100 kcal)

Protein — Crab (cooked): 20.3 g, Shrimp (cooked): 24.2 g · Fiber — Crab (cooked): 0 g, Shrimp (cooked): no data · Sodium — Crab (cooked): 343.6 mg, Shrimp (cooked): 112.1 mg

Generic USDA foods (not brands), so both carry micronutrients. Numbers are per 100 g unless the portion toggle is on. USDA FoodData Central, as of 2026-08-12.

Common questions

Is Crab (cooked) or Shrimp (cooked) better?

Neither is “better” on its own — it depends what you want from it. The table shows where each is higher; the short answer says when each one fits. Compare on the same basis (per 100 g) and pick for your dish and your goal.

How were these numbers worked out?

Straight from USDA FoodData Central for the generic form of each food, per 100 g. We show the portion view too, but portion sizes differ between foods, so per 100 g is the fair comparison.

Why does one column say “no data”?

Because USDA has no value for that nutrient in that food — so we leave it blank rather than print a 0 that would read as “none”. A real zero from USDA still shows as 0.