Catel-Roc 6 Petites Galettes Catel-Roc · Nutrisiq

Back to discovery

Catel-Roc 6 Petites Galettes Catel-Roc packshot

Nutrition snapshot

Catel-Roc 6 Petites Galettes Catel-Roc

Name: Catel-Roc 6 Petites Galettes Catel-Roc
Brand: Catel-Roc
SKU: 3448040101016

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 Catel-Roc 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 3 anchors the processing indicator.

Need attention

Mandatory field coverage is only partial (63%).

Uncertain or missing data

The record is missing a nutrition panel.

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

CategoryFood

Label information quality79/100

Data confidence

PackagingPlastique

Ownership

Processing

Highly processed

Formulation complexity

Environmental signal

NOVA groupNOVA 3

Performance

Nutrition score60/100 · Grade C

Ingredient-level explanation

eau, farine de blé noir (34 %), sel

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 60/100

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

high

Data confidence

Data confidence 90/100

High reliability

The data is strong and the assessment carries high 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

60/100

Nutrition score is available, but some inputs were inferred.

Processing

Highly processed

Processing indicator kept separate from the nutrition score.

Environmental signal

Mixed

51/100

Estimated environmental signal with limited precision.

Label quality

Strong

79/100

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 broad and consistent. The interpretation is likely to remain stable.

Score drivers

What shaped the separate signals

Supports the assessment

No clear positive highlights emerged from the available data.
Impact: low

Pulls the score down

Declared NOVA group 3 anchors the processing indicator.
Impact: high
Mandatory field coverage is only partial (63%).
Impact: medium

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, quantity, nutrition panel, and allergens. Scores stay visible, but weaker evidence is reflected in the confidence dimension.

Similar options worth comparing

La marqueze Mini gâteau basque à la cerise

Food. Evidence quality: medium

27/100

nutrition score

Food

Score summary

Nutrition score

Weak

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

Strongest: Label qualityWeakest: Nutrition profile

Data confidence

75/100

medium reliability

Nutrition profile

Weak

27/100

Nutrition profile

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

Processing

Processing unknown

Insufficient evidence

—

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

74/100

Label quality

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

medium confidence from label, nutrition, and source coverage

View product

Open Food Facts Temporaire

Food. Ingredients: E422 E412 E500ii E450i E330 E471 E260 maltodextrine, amidon modifié, gomme xanthane, E150d, disulfite de potassium, acide citrique. Evidence quality: medium

60/100

nutrition score

Food

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

60/100

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

57/100

Environmental signal

Affected by packaging, origin, and estimate coverage.

Label quality

Quite good

71/100

Label quality

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

Marque Repère Cheese burgers x 2

Food. Ingredients: Produit a base de viande hachee de boeuf cuite aromatisee 38 % : viande bovine (37,5%), arome). pain spécial décongelé 38%* : farine de {allergene}blé{/allergene}, eau, levure, dextrose, huile de colza, huile de tournesol, graines de {allergene}sésame{/allergene}, sucre, arôme, sel, {allergene}gluten{/allergene} de {allergene}blé{/allergene}, farine de fève, émulsifiants : e471-e472e, conservateur :e282, vinaigre, agent de traitement de la farine : e300, enzyme ({allergene}gluten{/allergene}). sauce 10% : ketchup(3,8%) (purée de tomates mi-réduites (2,55%), sucre, vinaigre, sirop de glucose, sel, acidifiant : e330, épaississant : e415, conservateurs : e211-e202, aromes naturels), huile de colza, eau, {allergene}moutarde{/allergene} douce (eau, graines de {allergene}moutarde{/allergene}, vinaigre, sel, épices, arômes, conservateur : {allergene}e[[:space:]]*222{/allergene} ({allergene}sulfites{/allergene})), sucre, amidon modifie, oignons, vinaigre, vinaigre de vin rouge (conservateur : {allergene}e[[:space:]]*222{/allergene} ({allergene}sulfites{/allergene}), sel, ail, basilic, épices, arôme naturel. cornichons 4% (cornichons, eau, vinaigre, sel). {allergene}fromage{/allergene} fondu 10%: {allergene}fromages{/allergene}, eau, {allergene}beurre{/allergene}, amidons modifies, protéines de {allergene}lait{/allergene}, {allergene}lactosérum{/allergene}, sels de fonte:e331-e452, gélifiant: e407, colorant:e160a, {allergene}lysozyme{/allergene} d'{allergene}oeuf{/allergene}. {traces}traces de fruits a coques et de soja. la viande bovine entrant dans la composition du produit est d'origine française. * ne pas recongeler. % exprime sur le produit total{/traces}. Evidence quality: high

45/100

nutrition score

Well-documented label

Tartefrais Tarte Normande

Food. Ingredients: Pommes 59% (UE-non UE), farine de blé, sucre, ceufs entiers, beurre, crème, huile de colza, semoule de blé, poudres à lever: diphosphates et carbonates de sodium, gélifiant : carraghénanes, sel. Notre tarte est fabriquée à partir de pommes entières, pelées et tranchées dans nos ateliers et peut donc contenir exceptionnellement quelques pépins et queues de pommes.. Evidence quality: high

49/100

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

91/100

high reliability

Nutrition profile

Mixed

49/100

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

51/100

Environmental signal

Affected by packaging, origin, and estimate coverage.

Label quality

Strong

88/100

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 3 anchors the processing indicator.

Need attention

Mandatory field coverage is only partial (63%).

Uncertain or missing data

The record is missing a nutrition panel.

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

CategoryFood

Label information quality79/100

Data confidence

PackagingPlastique

Ownership

Processing

Highly processed

Formulation complexity

Environmental signal

NOVA groupNOVA 3

Performance

Nutrition score60/100 · Grade C

Ingredient-level explanation

eau, farine de blé noir (34 %), sel

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 60/100

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

high

Data confidence

Data confidence 90/100

High reliability

The data is strong and the assessment carries high 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

60/100

Nutrition score is available, but some inputs were inferred.

Processing

Highly processed

Processing indicator kept separate from the nutrition score.

Environmental signal

Mixed

51/100

Estimated environmental signal with limited precision.

Label quality

Strong

79/100

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

How is the score built?

Open the methodology note

The data is broad and consistent. The interpretation is likely to remain stable.

Score drivers

What shaped the separate signals

Supports the assessment

No clear positive highlights emerged from the available data.
Impact: low

Pulls the score down

Declared NOVA group 3 anchors the processing indicator.
Impact: high
Mandatory field coverage is only partial (63%).
Impact: medium

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

Similar options worth comparing

La marqueze Mini gâteau basque à la cerise

Food. Evidence quality: medium

27/100

nutrition score

Food

Score summary

Nutrition score

Weak

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

Strongest: Label qualityWeakest: Nutrition profile

Data confidence

75/100

medium reliability

Nutrition profile

Weak

27/100

Nutrition profile

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

Processing

Processing unknown

Insufficient evidence

—

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

74/100

Label quality

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

medium confidence from label, nutrition, and source coverage

View product

Open Food Facts Temporaire

Food. Ingredients: E422 E412 E500ii E450i E330 E471 E260 maltodextrine, amidon modifié, gomme xanthane, E150d, disulfite de potassium, acide citrique. Evidence quality: medium

60/100

nutrition score

Food

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

60/100

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

57/100

Environmental signal

Affected by packaging, origin, and estimate coverage.

Label quality

Quite good

71/100

Label quality

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

Marque Repère Cheese burgers x 2

45/100

nutrition score

Well-documented label

Tartefrais Tarte Normande

49/100

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

91/100

high reliability

Nutrition profile

Mixed

49/100

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

51/100

Environmental signal

Affected by packaging, origin, and estimate coverage.

Label quality

Strong

88/100

Label quality

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

Catel-Roc 6 Petites Galettes Catel-Roc

Nutrient profile

Need attention

What would improve the assessment

Processing level

Need attention

Label quality

Need attention

Uncertain or missing data

Environmental signal

What would improve the assessment

Facts used for scoring

Design

Ownership

Performance

Five-layer evaluation

Nutrition score 60/100

How the separate signals line up

What shaped the separate signals

Similar options worth comparing

La marqueze Mini gâteau basque à la cerise

Open Food Facts Temporaire

Marque Repère Cheese burgers x 2

Tartefrais Tarte Normande

Catel-Roc 6 Petites Galettes Catel-Roc

Nutrient profile

Need attention

What would improve the assessment

Processing level

Need attention

Label quality

Need attention

Uncertain or missing data

Environmental signal

What would improve the assessment

Facts used for scoring

Design

Ownership

Performance

Five-layer evaluation

Nutrition score 60/100

How the separate signals line up

What shaped the separate signals

Similar options worth comparing

La marqueze Mini gâteau basque à la cerise

Open Food Facts Temporaire

Marque Repère Cheese burgers x 2

Tartefrais Tarte Normande

What lowers the rating

Lapse vaate riskisignaalid