Macro Meal Calculator
Splits a daily macro target across meals of unequal size and converts each one into the food weight you actually put on the scale, raw or cooked.
Macro Meal Calculator
Results recalculate instantly on every keystroke. Nothing you type is transmitted.
What this result does not account for
- This page distributes an existing daily target. It does not set one, which requires bodyweight, activity level and a goal.
- Cooking yield factors vary with method, temperature and how far the food is cooked. A well-done steak loses considerably more than the figure used here.
- Protein contents are representative database values; real foods vary by cut, brand and preparation, and brined poultry carries added water.
- The 4-4-9 factors are population averages that overstate energy for high-fibre foods by several percent.
In short: Take your daily targets, allocate a share to this meal, then convert grams of protein into grams of food. The step that ruins most tracking is raw versus cooked: 200 g of cooked rice logged as dry reads 730 kcal against an actual 292, while 150 g of cooked chicken logged as raw reads 248 against 339. Grains overstate by hundreds, meat understates by tens, and the two errors do not cancel.
Formula
[('meal share', 'The proportion of the day this meal represents. Meals are rarely equal, and forcing them to be is why rigid plans fail.'), ('protein per 100 g', 'Protein content of the raw food, used to convert a gram target into a weight you can measure.'), ('cooking factor', 'Multiply raw weight by it to get cooked weight. Below 1 for meat, above 1 for grains.'), ('4, 4 and 9', 'Atwater general factors, kilocalories per gram.')]
Worked Example
- Start from a daily target. From the macro or TDEE calculator. This page distributes an existing target rather than setting one.
- Allocate a share to this meal. Twenty percent for a light breakfast, forty for a large dinner. They need not be equal.
- Convert protein grams into food grams. Divide by the protein content per 100 g. That is the number for the scale.
- Match the state you log to the state you weighed. Raw with raw, cooked with cooked. This single discipline removes the largest error in food tracking.
A 2,200 kcal day at 165 g protein, 220 g carbohydrate and 61 g fat, with this meal taking a third: 55 g protein, 73 g carbohydrate and 20 g fat, about 696 kcal. Fifty-five grams of protein from chicken breast at 31 g per 100 g means 177 g raw, which finishes at about 129 g cooked. Note also that the daily macros imply 2,089 kcal rather than the stated 2,200 — a 5% gap that exists in the original targets and is worth seeing rather than silently inheriting.
Strengths & Limits Of This Model
Where this engine is strong
- Converts gram targets into actual food weights, which is the step most macro tools leave to the user.
- Handles meals of unequal size rather than assuming an even split.
- Reports the reconciliation gap between stated calories and stated macros instead of hiding it.
Where it stops
- Covers one protein source per meal rather than a full multi-ingredient plate.
- Cannot know your actual cooking yields, which vary by kitchen and method.
Practical Use Cases
Turning a macro plan into actual cooking
The gap between a gram target and a shopping list is where most plans quietly fail.
Meal prepping to a target
Weigh the batch raw, cook, divide by weight, and one calculation covers every container.
Handling meals of unequal size
Where an even three-way split does not reflect how anyone actually eats.
Diagnosing why tracking is not working
Usually a raw-versus-cooked mismatch rather than a discipline problem.
Choosing between protein sources
Seeing that 55 g of protein is 177 g of chicken or 318 g of tofu changes what is realistic on a plate.
Methodology & Editorial Standards
Meal macros are the daily targets multiplied by the meal's share. Energy uses the Atwater general factors of 4, 4 and 9 kilocalories per gram, and the calculator explicitly reports any gap between the calories those macros imply and the daily calorie target entered, since independently chosen figures rarely reconcile. Protein contents per 100 g of raw food are chicken breast 31.0, lean beef 26.0, dry lentils 25.8, salmon 20.4, dry chickpeas 19.3, firm tofu 17.3, egg 12.6 and Greek yogurt 10.0. Raw-to-cooked factors follow published cooking yield data: chicken breast 0.73, ground beef 90/10 0.715, salmon 0.785, egg 0.925, spinach 0.175, pasta 2.20, brown rice 2.35, white rice 2.50, quinoa 2.75 and rolled oats 3.50. The worked error figures use 3.65 kcal per gram for dry white rice and 1.65 kcal per gram for raw chicken breast. Cooking is treated as changing weight but not energy, which is the physical basis for the whole raw-versus-cooked distinction.
Computation runs in IEEE-754 double precision at full internal precision; rounding to two decimal places occurs strictly at the display layer, so no cumulative drift enters the result. All monetary outputs use accounting presentation — grouped thousands, two decimals, negatives in parentheses — so figures can be transcribed directly into a model or working paper. Division-by-zero and out-of-domain inputs return an em-dash rather than a misleading number.
This engine was reconciled against an independent reference implementation and hand-verified for the worked example above before release. Our full five-stage review process is published on the About Us page.
Disclaimer. This calculator is provided for informational and modelling purposes only and does not constitute financial, tax, legal, medical, or engineering advice. Verify all figures with a qualified professional before acting on them.
Macro Meal Calculator — 10 Expert FAQs
10 analyst-written answers to the questions practitioners actually ask — optimised for voice and answer-engine retrieval.
Should I weigh food raw or cooked for tracking macros
Either, provided the database entry you log matches the state you weighed. Raw is generally more reproducible, because cooking removes a variable amount of water depending on heat, time and method, so the same raw weight can finish at noticeably different cooked weights on different days. Raw is also more practical for batch cooking, since you can weigh the total before it goes in the pan.
What happens if I weigh cooked food but log the raw entry
You get a large error whose direction depends on the food. For rice and pasta you overstate badly: 200 g of cooked rice logged as dry records 730 calories against an actual 292. For meat you understate: 150 g of cooked chicken logged as raw records 248 calories against an actual 339. Anyone weighing everything after cooking while logging raw entries is over-counting carbohydrate and under-counting protein at the same time.
Does cooking change the calories in food
No, only the weight. Water leaves meat and enters grains, and water carries no energy. A chicken breast has the same calories before and after cooking; it simply weighs less, which makes it more calorie dense per gram. Rice has the same calories dry and cooked, but having absorbed two and a half times its weight in water it is far less dense per gram once cooked.
How much does chicken shrink when cooked
Chicken breast finishes at roughly 73% of its raw weight, so 200 g raw becomes about 146 g cooked. Chicken thigh loses slightly more at about 68.5%, ground beef 90/10 about 71.5%, and fattier 80/20 mince nearer 66%. Salmon holds up better at about 78.5% and shrimp at 81.5%. If you only have a cooked weight, divide by the factor to recover the raw equivalent.
How much does rice expand when cooked
White rice finishes at about two and a half times its dry weight, so 100 g dry becomes roughly 250 g cooked. Brown rice is around 2.35, pasta 2.2, quinoa 2.75 and rolled oats as much as 3.5. These vary with how much water was used and how long it cooked, which is precisely why weighing grains dry is more reliable than weighing them cooked.
Why do my macros not add up to my calorie target
Because the four numbers were probably set independently. Multiply protein and carbohydrate by 4 and fat by 9 and see what they imply: a target of 2,200 calories with 165 g protein, 220 g carbohydrate and 61 g fat actually implies 2,089, a 5% gap. Small gaps come from rounding the gram figures. Large ones mean one number is stale, usually the calorie figure carried over from an earlier plan.
How should I split macros across meals
However fits your day, with two caveats. Protein is worth distributing fairly evenly rather than concentrated in one meal, because there is a practical limit to how much is used well at a single sitting. Carbohydrate and fat can be moved around freely to suit training, appetite and social eating. An even three-way split is a starting point, not a rule, and 20/40/40 across breakfast, lunch and dinner is closer to how most people actually eat.
How much chicken do I need for 40 g of protein
About 129 g of raw chicken breast, at roughly 31 g of protein per 100 g raw, which finishes at around 94 g cooked. The same 40 g of protein would need about 154 g of lean beef, 196 g of salmon or 231 g of firm tofu. Seeing those weights side by side is often what makes a plant based protein target feel realistic or not.
Is this different from a daily macro calculator
Yes. A daily macro calculator sets your targets for the whole day from bodyweight, activity and a goal. This page starts from those targets and answers the next question: what does one meal of that look like, and what weight of actual food do I put on the scale. If you do not have daily targets yet, set those first.
Do I need to weigh vegetables too
For most non-starchy vegetables it changes very little and is rarely worth the effort. The exceptions are starchy vegetables such as potatoes, sweetcorn and peas, and anything cooked in oil, where the oil is far more significant than the vegetable. Spinach is a special case worth knowing: it cooks down to under a fifth of its raw weight, so a raw and cooked portion look nothing alike on a scale.