Canned fish like canned tuna and salmon are great pantry staples. Not only are they convenient and budget-friendly, but they’re also a rich source of essential nutrients like omega-3 fatty acids. These fatty acids are essential for maintaining brain health, reducing inflammation, and potentially reducing the risk of heart disease.
But if you’re choosing between the two, which one delivers more of these healthy fats? Keep reading to learn about the omega-3 content of canned tuna and salmon and compare factors such as mercury levels, protein, sodium, and cost.
Canned tuna is one of the most popular seafood options across the globe, and it’s no surprise why. It’s versatile, affordable, and a good source of omega-3s.
Tuna contains two key types of omega-3 fatty acids: DHA (docosahexaenoic acid) and EPA (eicosapentaenoic acid), which are linked to improved heart health and reduced inflammation.
However, the omega-3 levels in tuna can vary depending on the type of tuna. For example:
- Light tuna (often made from skipjack tuna) contains roughly 0.2–0.3 grams of omega-3s per 3-ounce serving.
- Albacore tuna (commonly labeled as “white tuna”) has a slightly higher omega-3 content of around 0.8–1.0 grams per 3-ounce serving.
- Ahi tuna (also known as yellowfin tuna) provides approximately 0.3–0.5 grams of omega-3s per 3-ounce serving.
Albacore tuna typically contains more omega-3s but may also have higher mercury levels.
Canned salmon is typically made from sockeye or pink salmon, which are rich in heart-healthy fats and have high DHA and EPA content.
On average, a 3-ounce serving of canned salmon contains:
- Sockeye salmon: Around 1.0–1.2 grams of omega-3s
- Pink salmon: About 0.7–1.0 grams of omega-3s
What gives salmon the edge is its consistently higher omega-3 content compared to most types of canned tuna. Additionally, canned salmon often comes in a more natural, whole-food form (skin and bones included in some cases), which can contribute trace nutrients like calcium.
Besides omega-3s, there are other nutritional factors to weigh when comparing canned tuna and salmon:
- Mercury content: Mercury is a concern in fish because it can build up in fishes’ bodies over time, especially in larger, predatory species. Consuming fish high in mercury could cause damage to your nervous system and impair brain development in young children and unborn babies. Tuna tends to have higher mercury levels, particularly albacore tuna. Light tuna is a safer bet for those limiting mercury intake. Salmon generally has very low mercury levels.
- Protein: Fish is an excellent source of complete protein, as it contains all the essential amino acids your body needs. Tuna has about 22–24 grams of protein per serving. Salmon is slightly lower, providing around 17–20 grams per serving.
- Sodium: Excessive sodium intake is a concern because it can lead to high blood pressure, increasing the risk of heart disease and stroke. If you’re watching your sodium intake, opt for low-sodium versions of either fish.
- Price: Tuna is often more affordable, with a can of light tuna costing around $1–2, while canned salmon typically ranges from $3–5.
- Antioxidants: Salmon is rich in astaxanthin, a powerful antioxidant that supports skin health and immunity, and may even reduce inflammation. Astaxanthin gives the fish its distinctive pink hue and offers numerous health benefits.
- Vitamin D: “Salmon is a great source of Vitamin D. While 3 ounces of light tuna provides 231 IU, 3 ounces of wild-caught salmon has almost double at 447 IU. Vitamin D is found in very few food sources and is essential for bone health and immune support,” Patricia Kolesa, MS, RDN, founder of Dietitian Dish LLC, told Health.
Choosing between canned tuna and salmon depends largely on your specific needs and preferences.
If omega-3 content is your primary focus, canned salmon (especially sockeye) takes the lead. It also tends to be a better choice if you’re concerned about mercury.
However, canned tuna is an excellent alternative for those on a tighter budget or seeking a slightly higher protein content. Light tuna can offer a more affordable option with reasonable omega-3 levels while keeping mercury intake moderate.
“I usually suggest mixing it up. Toss canned tuna into a quick salad or sandwich, and try frozen or canned salmon in patties or grain bowls,” Samantha DeVito, MS, RD, told Health. Both have their place in a balanced diet, and rotating them helps keep meals interesting while also lowering mercury exposure from tuna.
“If you are looking to boost your omega-3 and vitamin D intake, salmon is a better choice, but if you want protein that is lower in overall calories, tuna is a better choice,” Carrie Gabriel, MS, RDN, dietitian and content creator, told Health.
“Both salmon and tuna are affordable, accessible sources of protein and healthy fats, and super easy to use in meals,” said DeVito. “Salmon tends to be higher in omega-3s, which are great for heart and brain health, while tuna is leaner and packs in a bit more protein per ounce.”
When deciding between the two, consider not only their omega-3 content but also factors like mercury levels, sodium, and cost.
Whatever you choose, including canned fish in your diet is a simple and effective way to reap the many benefits of omega-3s while creating delicious, versatile meals.
