Food is a key pleasure of traveling, but travelers face a trade-off between exploring curious new local food and choosing comfortable, familiar options. This creates demand for personalized recommendation systems that balance these competing factors. To the best of our knowledge, conventional recommendation methods cannot provide recommendations that offer both curiosity and comfort for food unknown to the user at a travel destination. In this study, we propose new quantitative methods for estimating comfort and curiosity: Kernel Density Scoring (KDS) and Mahalanobis Distance Scoring (MDS). KDS probabilistically estimates food history distribution using kernel density estimation, while MDS uses Mahalanobis distances between foods. These methods score food based on how their representation vectors fit the estimated distributions. We also propose a ranking method measuring the balance between comfort and curiosity based on taste and ingredients. This balance is defined as curiosity (return) gained per unit of comfort (risk) in choosing a food. For evaluation the proposed method, we newly collected a dataset containing user surveys on Japanese food and assessments of foreign food regarding comfort and curiosity. Comparing our methods against the existing method, the Wilcoxon signed-rank test showed that when estimating comfort from taste and curiosity from ingredients, the MDS-based method outperformed the Baseline, while the KDS-based method showed no significant differences. When estimating curiosity from taste and comfort from ingredients, both methods outperformed the Baseline. The MDS-based method consistently outperformed KDS in ROC-AUC values.