All the values I used for protein/fat/carb/calories in my diet plans are from the raw versions, or grass-fed raw versions.
The macronutrients are going to be similar to what those data show, that isn't the issue, the issue is that even raw foods that most people cook after buying in stores have their nutrition labeled as if you consume them raw. The nutrition labels here in the US have to assume you eat it just as you buy it, even though most people don't. Therefore, most people eat more food volume and weight vs their raw dieters. Calculators online are probably designed for those people, not for raw dieters. Either way, either the cooked food dieters are eating too little if they strictly adhere to calculators, or raw food dieters are eating too much. A calculator can't account for both cooked diets and raw diets with no option to specify the percentage of food you eat is raw or cooked. Similarly, there are not two-labels on most foods, one for cooked, and one for raw. It just comes in the form you buy it.
In addition to that, high quality raw animal food contains less waste and higher bioavailibility than its cooked counterparts, nutrition calculators can't account for that either.
Also keto-adapted bodies may be more efficient by evoking autophagy (using energy from recycling cell parts) to a lesser degree than fasting, which otherwise would only become waste (alternative fuel source).
