Fish Curry Calories: Rohu and Hilsa Worked Out

By NYUS Inc. · Published 29 October 2026

"Fish curry calories", with "per 100g", "per 200g", "and protein" and "per serving", is searched in India, and the answers online differ. No primary table has a fish curry record: IFCT 2017, the Indian Food Composition Tables from ICMR-NIN, prints almost entirely raw foods (its few cooked rows are boiled and omelette eggs and roasted vermicelli) and no fish curry, gravy or other mixed dish, and no cooking oil row, and USDA FoodData Central SR Legacy has no fish curry record. So this page does not quote a number. It works one portion out line by line: the fish, onion, tomato, ginger and garlic from named IFCT 2017 rows and the oil from a USDA record, with weights that are our assumptions and the oil shown apart so you can see what it adds, for a rohu curry and a hilsa curry. They are estimates, shown so you can change the weights to match your pot. For the raw rows see our fish protein guide, for more fish rows our bhetki, tilapia and tuna guide, and for the teaspoon values our ghee, oil and sugar guide.

The short answer

By our working, one portion of rohu curry (150 g raw rohu, onion 100 g, tomato 100 g, ginger 5 g, garlic 5 g and 2 teaspoons of oil) is about 308.8 kcal and 32.3 g protein, and the same with hilsa is about 543.7 kcal and 35.4 g protein. Across 100 to 200 g of raw fish, for both rohu and hilsa, and 1 to 3 teaspoons of oil the range is 217.9 to 712.8 kcal, every cell cooked with oil. These are estimates from the weights below, not measured values and not from a curry record. Our reading: in each main case the fish is the largest line (153.4 kcal for rohu, 388.3 kcal for hilsa, against 75.8 kcal for the onion, tomato, ginger and garlic and 79.6 kcal for the oil), and the hilsa curry is 234.9 kcal above the rohu curry at equal weights.

IFCT 2017 rows used, per 100 g

IFCT 2017 Table 1 prints, per 100 g edible portion, water, protein, ash, total fat and energy in kJ for each food, with carbohydrate and fibre columns for plant foods (the fish rows print neither). We read these 6 rows from the PDF text on 29 October 2026, as the mean of the regions shown; the kcal is ours (kJ divided by 4.184, to 0.1). IFCT prints no portion weights and these rows are raw foods, so we count raw weights; the fish rows are the raw edible portion.

The oil: USDA SR Legacy, per 100 g

IFCT 2017 has no cooking oil row, so the oil comes from USDA FoodData Central SR Legacy; it is a US record. Energy is USDA's kcal with the kJ beside it; water, protein, total fat and carbohydrate (by difference) are in g, then fibre (g), total sugars (g) and sodium (mg), all per 100 g.

The data-type label on each USDA field, as the record shows it

USDA's record page shows a data-type label beside some fields and none beside others. This table copies what the record shows, read field by field from the nutrient table of the record page; "no label shown" means the record prints no label there, and "not printed" means the record has no row for that field. We do not interpret the labels beyond printing them. IFCT 2017 prints no such labels.

The household portions USDA prints for the oil

These are the entries in the record's Measures list, as printed; the other entry is 100 g. The kcal in the last column is ours: the printed kcal per 100 g times the grams, divided by 100, shown to 0.1.

The portion sums: 171410 1 tsp (4.5 g): 884 × 4.5 / 100 = 39.78, so 39.8 kcal; 171410 1 cup (216 g): 884 × 216 / 100 = 1909.44, so 1909.4 kcal; 171410 1 tbsp (13.5 g): 884 × 13.5 / 100 = 119.34, so 119.3 kcal. By the same arithmetic 1 teaspoon (4.5 g) is 39.8 kcal, 2 teaspoons 79.6 kcal and 3 teaspoons 119.3 kcal.

Worked example 1: rohu curry

Every weight here is our assumption for one portion, counted raw: 150 g of raw fish (the way IFCT's rows are given: edible portion), onion, tomato, ginger and garlic, cooked in peanut oil. Each IFCT line is the kJ divided by 4.184, times the grams, divided by 100, to 0.1 kcal; the oil line is USDA's printed kcal per 100 g times the grams, divided by 100; protein is the table's protein per 100 g times the grams, divided by 100. Spice powders, salt, coconut, cream and curd are not counted, and the weight of the cooked curry is not printed in any table.

The grid varies the weight of raw fish (100, 150 or 200 g) and the oil (1, 2 or 3 teaspoons); the onion, tomato, ginger and garlic stay as above.

Worked example 2: hilsa curry

Same method and the same onion, tomato, ginger, garlic and oil; only the fish row changes, to IFCT P017 (hilsa), which prints far more fat than the rohu and is a 2-region mean where the rohu row is a 6-region mean.

The grid varies the weight of raw fish (100, 150 or 200 g) and the oil (1, 2 or 3 teaspoons); the onion, tomato, ginger and garlic stay as above.

The two main cases side by side

These are the single examples used in the short answer; each follows from the tables above and from the weights in the cell.

What stands out in the numbers

• The fish is the largest line: 150 g of raw fish is 153.4 kcal for rohu (IFCT S006) and 388.3 kcal for hilsa (P017), against 75.8 kcal for 100 g of onion, 100 g of tomato, ginger and garlic together.
• Rohu against hilsa: at 150 g and 2 teaspoons of oil the hilsa curry is 234.9 kcal higher, which follows from the rows' energy (1083 kJ per 100 g for hilsa against 428 kJ for rohu, with 18.49 g of fat against 2.39 g); the hilsa row has the higher protein (21.80 g against 19.71 g per 100 g), so the higher-energy fish is not the lower-protein one here.
• Oil against fish weight: in this working the fish weight (100 to 200 g) moves the rohu curry more than the oil: 102.3 kcal against 79.5 kcal. Each teaspoon is 39.8 kcal.
• Protein: about 32.3 g in the main-case rohu curry and 35.4 g in the hilsa curry.
• These are estimates: no curry record exists, the weights are ours, and coconut, cream, curd, potato or more oil will be higher.

Why these are estimates, not your curry

• No record exists for the dish. IFCT 2017 prints almost entirely raw foods and no mixed dish, and USDA SR Legacy has no fish curry record.
• The weights are assumptions. No table prints how much fish, gravy base or oil one portion takes; ours are stated so you can replace them.
• Fish weight is raw edible portion. A portion served with bones or skin is not what these rows describe, and they add to the weight of a plate without adding to the fish.
• No per 100 g figure. No table prints a cooked curry weight, so a calories-per-100-g number cannot be derived from these rows.
• US oil data. The oil row is a US record; IFCT has none.
• Labels are printed, not judged. Calculated and the other labels are USDA's words on the record; we print them and draw no conclusion from them.

How to log it so the numbers hold

• Log it by parts. Weigh the fish raw, edible portion only, estimate the onion and tomato, and log the oil by its own weight (weight × figure ÷ 100); our ghee, oil and sugar guide has the teaspoon values.
• Say which fish. Rohu and hilsa differ by 234.9 kcal at the same weight and oil.
• Say how much oil. It is an input this page cannot know; a teaspoon is 39.8 kcal.
• Log the rice or roti separately. They are not in these figures.

Where NYUS fits (our app)

We make NYUS, so read this as ours. NYUS is an AI fitness and nutrition coach in early access on Android, with no ads and no data selling. You log foods yourself by searching 8,900+ Indian and global foods or by barcode, and a weekly check-in adjusts your calories, macros and step goal once enough is logged. Barcode coverage of Indian packaged foods is not complete, so search by name when a scan finds nothing.

What this page leaves out

• A measured calorie figure for fish curry as a dish: no primary record prints one, so every figure here is an estimate from stated weights.
• A calorie target, and any claim about what fish or this curry does to your body: we have not looked up any for any person, so we give none. If you have a medical condition or are pregnant, ask your doctor or dietitian.
• Spice powders, salt, coconut, cream, curd, potato, cashew paste, and other versions such as fried fish, coconut-based or mustard-based fish curries with extra ingredients, or curry cooked with bones: not covered; log them from their own rows.
• Restaurant, dhaba and packaged fish curries: no table prints a restaurant weight or oil use, so we give no such figure; read the pack for packaged ones.
• Other fish rows (pomfret, mackerel, sardine and the rest) and other IFCT rows for the same vegetables: they exist and are not used here.
• Nutrients beyond energy, water, protein, fat, carbohydrate, fibre, total sugars and sodium: not covered here.

Sources

• ICMR-NIN, Indian Food Composition Tables 2017 (IFCT 2017), Table 1, per 100 g edible portion, mean of the regions shown (read from the PDF text 29 October 2026): S006 Rohu (6 regions, 428 kJ, PDF p. 68); P017 Hilsa (2 regions, 1083 kJ, PDF p. 63); G017 Onion, big (6 regions, 201 kJ, PDF p. 54); D075 Tomato, ripe, hybrid (6 regions, 79 kJ, PDF p. 48); G014 Ginger, fresh (6 regions, 230 kJ, PDF p. 54); G011 Garlic, big clove (6 regions, 518 kJ, PDF p. 54). IFCT 2017 prints almost entirely raw foods (its few cooked rows are boiled and omelette eggs and roasted vermicelli) and no fish curry, gravy or other mixed dish, and no cooking oil row (PDF text searched for curry, gravy, masala and oil; the P rows run P001 to P091 (fish) and P092 (cat fish eggs), PDF pp. 63 to 67, rohu is in the S rows, and we use P017 (hilsa, PDF p. 63) and S006 (rohu, PDF p. 68)).
• USDA FoodData Central, SR Legacy 171410 (Oil, peanut, salad or cooking): Energy 884 kcal (3700 kJ), protein 0 g, total fat 100 g, carbohydrate by difference 0 g, fibre 0 g, total sugars 0 g, sodium 0 mg per 100 g; labels as printed: kcal Calculated, carbohydrate by difference no label shown, total sugars Assumed zero (Insignificant amount or not naturally occurring in a food, such as fiber in meat); portions used: 1 tsp (4.5 g); 1 cup (216 g); 1 tbsp (13.5 g) (read 29 October 2026).
• nyus.in, the NYUS landing page, read on 29 October 2026 for the app statements in the NYUS section and the CTA.

The ingredient weights, the kJ to kcal conversions, the line values, the sums, the grids, the portion kcal, the rounding, the comparisons and every sentence starting "Our reading" are NYUS's own assumptions, arithmetic or opinion, not from USDA or IFCT. The IFCT values are the means printed in IFCT 2017 Table 1; the USDA values, data-type labels and Measures-list portions are exactly as shown on the USDA record page. The names in the first column are the tables' own names.

Frequently asked questions