No Manfacturer Ice Cream Cups · Nutrisiq

Back to discovery

Nutrition snapshot

No Manfacturer Ice Cream Cups

Name: No Manfacturer Ice Cream Cups
Brand: No Manfacturer
SKU: 0041498218188

The nutrient profile is mixed or moderate based on the available evidence.

Nutrition score

/100

Nutrition interpretation

Moderate signal

The nutrient profile is mixed or moderate based on the available evidence.

Help improve this record

Improve product data

Explore alternatives More from No Manfacturer Suggest correction

Signal classes

Need attention

Core nutrient evidence is incomplete, so the nutrition score is unavailable.

What would improve the assessment

Part of this signal relies on inferred values, so direct declared data would improve reliability.

Need attention

Declared NOVA group 4 anchors the processing indicator.
Formulation markers such as letsitiin support a more processed classification.
A long ingredient list (44 ingredients) supports a more processed classification.

Supporting factors

Mandatory field coverage is strong (88%).

What would improve the assessment

Part of this signal relies on inferred values, so direct declared data would improve reliability.

Structured source data

Facts used for scoring

Design

CategoryUndefined

Label information quality71/100

Data confidence

Quantity4.5 g

Ownership

Processing

Very highly processed

Formulation complexity

Environmental signal

NOVA groupNOVA 4

Performance

Energy / 100g

355.56 kcal

Nutrition score65/100 · Grade C

Ingredient-level explanation

ENRICHED WHEAT FLOUR (WHEAT FLOUR, NIACIN, REDUCED IRON, THIAMIN MONONITRATE, RIBOFLAVIN, FOLIC ACID), TAPIOCA FLOUR, SUGAR, VEGETABLE OIL SHORTENING (SOYBEAN OIL OR CANOLA OIL, MODIFIED PALM OIL, SOY LECITHIN), LEAVENING (SODIUM BICARBONATE, AMMONIUM BICARBONATE), SALT, NATURAL FLAVOR, ANNATTO (VEGETABLE COLOR).

Food score panel

Five-layer evaluation

Each dimension stays separate so the product can score well in one area and weakly in another without hiding trade-offs.

Nutrition score

/100

Nutrition profile

Nutrition score 65/100

Quite good

label quality is the strongest signal right now, while processing needs the most caution.

Strongest area

Label quality

Weakest area

Processing

Data confidence

medium

Data confidence

Data confidence 59/100

Medium reliability

Data coverage is partial and the interpretation carries moderate confidence.

Confidence layer

Category breakdown

How the separate signals line up

The overall assessment is good, but some areas warrant further review.

Nutrition profile

Quite good

65/100

Nutrition score is available, but some inputs were inferred.

Processing

Very highly processed

Processing indicator kept separate from the nutrition score.

Environmental signal

Mixed

57/100

Estimated environmental signal with limited precision.

Label quality

Quite good

71/100

Label quality reflects completeness and consistency of the record, not nutrition quality.

How is the score built?

Open the methodology note

Nutrition score measures nutrient profile only. Processing, environment, label quality, and data confidence stay separate so missing data or formulation signals do not silently change nutrition quality.

The data is partial. The interpretation is usable but some conclusions may be refined.

Score drivers

What shaped the separate signals

Supports the assessment

Mandatory field coverage is strong (88%).
Impact: medium

Pulls the score down

Declared NOVA group 4 anchors the processing indicator.
Impact: high
Formulation markers such as letsitiin support a more processed classification.
Impact: low
A long ingredient list (44 ingredients) supports a more processed classification.
Impact: low

Uncertain area

Core nutrient evidence is incomplete, so the nutrition score is unavailable.
Impact: high
Confidence is reduced by missing nutrition evidence.
Impact: high
Record completeness is 44%.
Impact: medium

Some source data is incomplete for this product: sugars per 100g, saturated fat per 100g, sodium per 100g or salt per 100g, fiber per 100g, protein per 100g, and front image. Scores stay visible, but weaker evidence is reflected in the confidence dimension.

Similar options worth comparing

Trader Joe's Spinach & Kale Biets

Undefined. Ingredients: SPINACH, EGGS, PANKO BREADCRUMBS (UNBLEACHED WHEAT FLOUR, SUGAR, YEAST, SALT), YELLOW ONION, KALE, PARMESAN CHEESE (PASTEURIZED PART SKIM MILK, CHEESE CULTURE, SALT, ENZYMES), UNSALTED BUTTER (CREAM), GREEN ONION, SEA SALT, BLACK PEPPER.. Evidence quality: medium

65/100

nutrition score

Undefined

Score summary

Nutrition score

Quite good

label quality is the strongest signal right now, while processing needs the most caution.

Strongest: Label qualityWeakest: Processing

Data confidence

63/100

medium reliability

Nutrition profile

Quite good

65/100

Nutrition profile

Affected by energy, sugars, saturated fat, sodium, fiber, limited protein support, and cautious fruit/vegetable/legume/nut credit.

Processing

Highly processed

Processing

Affected by ingredient complexity and degree of processing.

Environmental signal

Mixed

57/100

Environmental signal

Affected by packaging, origin, and estimate coverage.

Label quality

Quite good

72/100

Label quality

Affected by field completeness and record consistency, not by nutrition quality.

medium confidence from label, nutrition, and source coverage

View product

Baker Josef's All Purpose Flour

Undefined. Ingredients: WHOLE GRAIN BROWN RICE FLOUR, POTATO STARCH, RICE FLOUR, TAPIOCA FLOUR.. Evidence quality: high

67/100

nutrition score

Well-documented labelStrong evidence coverage

Score summary

Nutrition score

Quite good

label quality is the strongest signal right now, while processing needs the most caution.

Strongest: Label qualityWeakest: Processing

Data confidence

79/100

high reliability

Nutrition profile

Quite good

67/100

Nutrition profile

Affected by energy, sugars, saturated fat, sodium, fiber, limited protein support, and cautious fruit/vegetable/legume/nut credit.

Processing

Highly processed

Processing

Affected by ingredient complexity and degree of processing.

Environmental signal

Mixed

57/100

Environmental signal

Affected by packaging, origin, and estimate coverage.

Label quality

Strong

93/100

Label quality

Affected by field completeness and record consistency, not by nutrition quality.

TRADER JOE'S this pumpkin walks into a bar... CEREAL BARS

Undefined. Ingredients: PUMPKIN FILLING (BROWN RICE SYRUP, ORGANIC DRIED CANE SYRUP, APPLE POWDER, PUMPKIN, GLYCERIN, MODIFIED FOOD STARCH, PECTIN, NATURAL FLAVOR, WATER, CITRIC ACID, CINNAMON, NUTMEG, ANNATTO EXTRACT FOR COLOR, GINGER, ALLSPICE), WHEAT FLAVOR, EVAPORATED CANE SYRUP, INVERT CANE SYRUP, EXPELLER PRESSED CANOLA OIL, OAT FLOUR, WHEAT BRAN, NATURAL FLAVORS (BUTTER, VANILLA, CITRUS), WHEAT GLUTEN, HONEY, CINNAMON, ORGANIC NONFAT DRY MILK, BAKING SODA, CREAM OF TARTAR, MALTODEXTRIN (FROM CORN), SOY LECITHIN (EMULSIFIER), SEA SALT, CARRAGEENAN, CLOVES, SOYBEAN OIL, ANNATTO AND TURMERIC (FOR COLOR). NUTRITION BLEND: NIACIN, VITAMIN B6 (PYRIDOXINE HYDROCHLORIDE), RIBOFLAVIN, VITAMIN B1 (THIAMIN HYDROCHLORIDE), FOLIC ACID, SODIUM SELENATE, VITAMIN B12 (CYANOCOBALAMINE).. Evidence quality: high

51/100

nutrition score

Well-documented labelStrong evidence coverage

Score summary

Nutrition score

Mixed

label quality is the strongest signal right now, while processing needs the most caution.

Strongest: Label qualityWeakest: Processing

Data confidence

87/100

high reliability

Nutrition profile

Mixed

51/100

Nutrition profile

Affected by energy, sugars, saturated fat, sodium, fiber, limited protein support, and cautious fruit/vegetable/legume/nut credit.

Processing

Very highly processed

Processing

Affected by ingredient complexity and degree of processing.

Environmental signal

Mixed

55/100

Environmental signal

Affected by packaging, origin, and estimate coverage.

Label quality

Strong

95/100

Label quality

Affected by field completeness and record consistency, not by nutrition quality.

Trader Joe's Garlic Salt

Undefined. Ingredients: SEA SALT, ROASTED GARLIC,ONION, PARSLEY.. Evidence quality: high

73/100

nutrition score

Well-documented labelStrong evidence coverage

Score summary

Nutrition score

Quite good

label quality is the strongest signal right now, while processing needs the most caution.

Strongest: Label qualityWeakest: Processing

Data confidence

78/100

high reliability

Nutrition profile

Quite good

73/100

Nutrition profile

Affected by energy, sugars, saturated fat, sodium, fiber, limited protein support, and cautious fruit/vegetable/legume/nut credit.

Processing

Highly processed

Processing

Affected by ingredient complexity and degree of processing.

Environmental signal

Mixed

57/100

Environmental signal

Affected by packaging, origin, and estimate coverage.

Label quality

Strong

85/100

Label quality

Affected by field completeness and record consistency, not by nutrition quality.

Signal classes

Need attention

Core nutrient evidence is incomplete, so the nutrition score is unavailable.

What would improve the assessment

Part of this signal relies on inferred values, so direct declared data would improve reliability.

Need attention

Declared NOVA group 4 anchors the processing indicator.
Formulation markers such as letsitiin support a more processed classification.
A long ingredient list (44 ingredients) supports a more processed classification.

Supporting factors

Mandatory field coverage is strong (88%).

What would improve the assessment

Part of this signal relies on inferred values, so direct declared data would improve reliability.

Structured source data

Facts used for scoring

Design

CategoryUndefined

Label information quality71/100

Data confidence

Quantity4.5 g

Ownership

Processing

Very highly processed

Formulation complexity

Environmental signal

NOVA groupNOVA 4

Performance

Energy / 100g

355.56 kcal

Nutrition score65/100 · Grade C

Ingredient-level explanation

Food score panel

Five-layer evaluation

Each dimension stays separate so the product can score well in one area and weakly in another without hiding trade-offs.

Nutrition score

/100

Nutrition profile

Nutrition score 65/100

Quite good

label quality is the strongest signal right now, while processing needs the most caution.

Strongest area

Label quality

Weakest area

Processing

Data confidence

medium

Data confidence

Data confidence 59/100

Medium reliability

Data coverage is partial and the interpretation carries moderate confidence.

Confidence layer

Category breakdown

How the separate signals line up

The overall assessment is good, but some areas warrant further review.

Nutrition profile

Quite good

65/100

Nutrition score is available, but some inputs were inferred.

Processing

Very highly processed

Processing indicator kept separate from the nutrition score.

Environmental signal

Mixed

57/100

Estimated environmental signal with limited precision.

Label quality

Quite good

71/100

Label quality reflects completeness and consistency of the record, not nutrition quality.

How is the score built?

Open the methodology note

The data is partial. The interpretation is usable but some conclusions may be refined.

Score drivers

What shaped the separate signals

Supports the assessment

Mandatory field coverage is strong (88%).
Impact: medium

Pulls the score down

Declared NOVA group 4 anchors the processing indicator.
Impact: high
Formulation markers such as letsitiin support a more processed classification.
Impact: low
A long ingredient list (44 ingredients) supports a more processed classification.
Impact: low

Uncertain area

Core nutrient evidence is incomplete, so the nutrition score is unavailable.
Impact: high
Confidence is reduced by missing nutrition evidence.
Impact: high
Record completeness is 44%.
Impact: medium

Similar options worth comparing

Trader Joe's Spinach & Kale Biets

65/100

nutrition score

Undefined

Score summary

Nutrition score

Quite good

label quality is the strongest signal right now, while processing needs the most caution.

Strongest: Label qualityWeakest: Processing

Data confidence

63/100

medium reliability

Nutrition profile

Quite good

65/100

Nutrition profile

Affected by energy, sugars, saturated fat, sodium, fiber, limited protein support, and cautious fruit/vegetable/legume/nut credit.

Processing

Highly processed

Processing

Affected by ingredient complexity and degree of processing.

Environmental signal

Mixed

57/100

Environmental signal

Affected by packaging, origin, and estimate coverage.

Label quality

Quite good

72/100

Label quality

Affected by field completeness and record consistency, not by nutrition quality.

medium confidence from label, nutrition, and source coverage

View product

Baker Josef's All Purpose Flour

Undefined. Ingredients: WHOLE GRAIN BROWN RICE FLOUR, POTATO STARCH, RICE FLOUR, TAPIOCA FLOUR.. Evidence quality: high

67/100

nutrition score

Well-documented labelStrong evidence coverage

Score summary

Nutrition score

Quite good

label quality is the strongest signal right now, while processing needs the most caution.

Strongest: Label qualityWeakest: Processing

Data confidence

79/100

high reliability

Nutrition profile

Quite good

67/100

Nutrition profile

Affected by energy, sugars, saturated fat, sodium, fiber, limited protein support, and cautious fruit/vegetable/legume/nut credit.

Processing

Highly processed

Processing

Affected by ingredient complexity and degree of processing.

Environmental signal

Mixed

57/100

Environmental signal

Affected by packaging, origin, and estimate coverage.

Label quality

Strong

93/100

Label quality

Affected by field completeness and record consistency, not by nutrition quality.

TRADER JOE'S this pumpkin walks into a bar... CEREAL BARS

51/100

nutrition score

Well-documented labelStrong evidence coverage

Score summary

Nutrition score

Mixed

label quality is the strongest signal right now, while processing needs the most caution.

Strongest: Label qualityWeakest: Processing

Data confidence

87/100

high reliability

Nutrition profile

Mixed

51/100

Nutrition profile

Affected by energy, sugars, saturated fat, sodium, fiber, limited protein support, and cautious fruit/vegetable/legume/nut credit.

Processing

Very highly processed

Processing

Affected by ingredient complexity and degree of processing.

Environmental signal

Mixed

55/100

Environmental signal

Affected by packaging, origin, and estimate coverage.

Label quality

Strong

95/100

Label quality

Affected by field completeness and record consistency, not by nutrition quality.

Trader Joe's Garlic Salt

Undefined. Ingredients: SEA SALT, ROASTED GARLIC,ONION, PARSLEY.. Evidence quality: high

73/100

nutrition score

Well-documented labelStrong evidence coverage

Score summary

Nutrition score

Quite good

label quality is the strongest signal right now, while processing needs the most caution.

Strongest: Label qualityWeakest: Processing

Data confidence

78/100

high reliability

Nutrition profile

Quite good

73/100

Nutrition profile

Affected by energy, sugars, saturated fat, sodium, fiber, limited protein support, and cautious fruit/vegetable/legume/nut credit.

Processing

Highly processed

Processing

Affected by ingredient complexity and degree of processing.

Environmental signal

Mixed

57/100

Environmental signal

Affected by packaging, origin, and estimate coverage.

Label quality

Strong

85/100

Label quality

Affected by field completeness and record consistency, not by nutrition quality.

No Manfacturer Ice Cream Cups

Nutrient profile

Need attention

What would improve the assessment

Processing level

Need attention

Label quality

Supporting factors

Environmental signal

What would improve the assessment

Facts used for scoring

Design

Ownership

Performance

Five-layer evaluation

Nutrition score 65/100

How the separate signals line up

What shaped the separate signals

Similar options worth comparing

Trader Joe's Spinach & Kale Biets

Baker Josef's All Purpose Flour

TRADER JOE'S this pumpkin walks into a bar... CEREAL BARS

Trader Joe's Garlic Salt

No Manfacturer Ice Cream Cups

Nutrient profile

Need attention

What would improve the assessment

Processing level

Need attention

Label quality

Supporting factors

Environmental signal

What would improve the assessment

Facts used for scoring

Design

Ownership

Performance

Five-layer evaluation

Nutrition score 65/100

How the separate signals line up

What shaped the separate signals

Similar options worth comparing

Trader Joe's Spinach & Kale Biets

Baker Josef's All Purpose Flour

TRADER JOE'S this pumpkin walks into a bar... CEREAL BARS

Trader Joe's Garlic Salt

What lowers the rating

Töödeldud lihatooted ja nitritid

Ultra-töödeldud toit (NOVA 4)

Lapse vaate riskisignaalid

Ultra-töödeldud profiil (NOVA 4) lapse menüüs