Name: Casino Plateau assortiment Oriental
Brand: Casino
SKU: 3222476496300

Facts used for scoring

Design

CategoryFood

Label information quality81/100

Data confidence

Quantity320 g

Ownership

Processing

Very highly processed

Formulation complexity

Environmental signal

NOVA groupNOVA 4

Performance

Nutrition scoreInsufficient evidence

Ingredient-level explanation

Briouats aux légumes : Eau - farine de _blé_ - courgette 10,1% - poivron rouge 9,1% - carotte 7,5% - fève pelée 7,2% - oignon préfrit (oignon - huile de tournesol) - miel - _amande_ effilée - protéine de _soja_ - huile de tournesol - fécule de manioc - huile d'olive - oignon déshydraté - blanc d'_oeuf_ en poudre - sel - coriandre - mélange d'épices ras el hanout - cannelle - émulsifiant : lécithines de colza. Pourcentages exprimés sur les briouats aux légumes. Pastillas au poulet : Viande de cuisse de poulet 26,6% (origine : France) - oignon préfrit 25.3% (oignon - huile de tournesol) - eau - farine de _blé_ - _amande_ effilée 6.6% - huile de tournesol - raisin sec (raisin - huile de coton) - sel - blanc d'_oeuf_ en poudre - sucre - coriandre - gingembre - cannelle - piment - émulsifiant : lécithines de colza - curcuma. Pourcentages exprimés sur les pastillas au poulet. Boulettes au bœuf kefta : Viande de bœuf 37.5% (origine : France) - oignon - huile de tournesol - tomate - eau - protéine de _soja_ 7% - chapelure (farine de _blé_ - sel) - fécule de manioc - _œuf_ en poudre - coriandre - ail - sel - paprika - arôme (contient _gluten_) - cumin - gingembre - coriandre en poudre - cannelle - poivre - piment - sucre - basilic. Pourcentages exprimés sur les boulettes kefta. Sauce blanche 12,5% : Eau - huile de colza - _lait_ écrémé en poudre - jaune d'_'_ salé - menthe - ail - sel - jus de citron concentré - amidon transformé de pomme de terre - acidifiant: : acide tartrique - épaississants : gomme guar, gomme xanthane - arôme naturel de menthe - conservateur : sorbate de potassium - poivre

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

No nutrition score

No reliable assessment

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 69/100

Medium reliability

Data coverage is partial and the interpretation carries moderate confidence.

Confidence layer

Category breakdown

How the separate signals line up

The data does not support a reliable overall result.

Nutrition profile

No reliable assessment

—

Nutrition score is unavailable because core nutrient evidence is incomplete.

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

Strong

81/100

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 (75%).
Impact: medium

Pulls the score down

Declared NOVA group 4 anchors the processing indicator.
Impact: high
A long ingredient list (111 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
The record is missing a nutrition panel.
Impact: high

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

Facts used for scoring

Design

CategoryFood

Label information quality81/100

Data confidence

Quantity320 g

Ownership

Processing

Very highly processed

Formulation complexity

Environmental signal

NOVA groupNOVA 4

Performance

Nutrition scoreInsufficient evidence

Ingredient-level explanation

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

No nutrition score

No reliable assessment

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 69/100

Medium reliability

Data coverage is partial and the interpretation carries moderate confidence.

Confidence layer

Category breakdown

How the separate signals line up

The data does not support a reliable overall result.

Nutrition profile

No reliable assessment

—

Nutrition score is unavailable because core nutrient evidence is incomplete.

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

Strong

81/100

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 (75%).
Impact: medium

Pulls the score down

Declared NOVA group 4 anchors the processing indicator.
Impact: high
A long ingredient list (111 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
The record is missing a nutrition panel.
Impact: high

Casino Plateau assortiment Oriental

Nutrient profile

Need attention

What would improve the assessment

Processing level

Need attention

Label quality

Supporting factors

Uncertain or missing data

Environmental signal

What would improve the assessment

Facts used for scoring

Design

Ownership

Performance

Five-layer evaluation

No nutrition score

How the separate signals line up

What shaped the separate signals

Casino Plateau assortiment Oriental

Nutrient profile

Need attention

What would improve the assessment

Processing level

Need attention

Label quality

Supporting factors

Uncertain or missing data

Environmental signal

What would improve the assessment

Facts used for scoring

Design

Ownership

Performance

Five-layer evaluation

No nutrition score

How the separate signals line up

What shaped the separate signals

What lowers the rating

Ultra-töödeldud toit (NOVA 4)

Lapse vaate riskisignaalid

Ultra-töödeldud profiil (NOVA 4) lapse menüüs