The nutrient profile is mixed or moderate based on the available evidence.
Help improve this record
Improve product dataRelated products
Veganic
Meat Alternatives. Ingredients: Water, wheat flour, rapeseed oil, lentil flour, baked eggplant, durum wheat flour, sunflower seed, vinegar, textured pea, beetroot powder, spices and flavorings, salt, sugar. May contain traces of soy, celery, sesame, mustard.. Evidence quality: high
high confidence from label, nutrition, and source coverage
Valio
Meat Alternatives. Ingredients: Vesi, gluteeniton kauralese 15 %, herneproteiini, härkäpapuproteiini, mausteet (sipuli, paprika, valkosipuli, tomaattijauhe, basilika, mustapippuri, maustepippuri, oregano, cayennepippuri), aromit, fariinisokeri, melassi, jodioitu suola, suola.. Evidence quality: high
high confidence from label, nutrition, and source coverage
Härkis
Meat Alternatives. Ingredients: Vesi, gluteeniton kauralese 15 %, herneproteiini, härkäpapuproteiini, mausteet (paprika, sipuli, tomaattijauhe, valkosipuli, juustokumina, chili, korianteri, oregano), aromit, sokeri, melassi, jodioitu suola.. Evidence quality: high
high confidence from label, nutrition, and source coverage
Sofine Food
Meat Alternatives. Ingredients: soy protein. Evidence quality: medium
medium confidence from label, nutrition, and source coverage
Structured source data
Ingredient-level explanation
Burkāni 50%; kartupeļi; ūdens; teksturēts zirnu proteins; garšvielas un dārzeni (sipoli; kiploki; tomāti burkāni pētersīļi); šķiedrvielas (kartupeļu, ceļmalites); kartupeļu ciete, kukurūzas milti; saulespuķu ella sals; garšaugi (koriandrs, ķiploki, sarkanie asie pipari, melnie pipari ); skābuma regulētāji: nātrija acetāts, citronskābe; antioksidants: askorbinskābe; rauga ekstrakts.
Nutrition score
Nutrition profile
label quality is the strongest signal right now, while environmental signal needs the most caution.
Strongest area
Label quality
Weakest area
Environmental signal
Data confidence
high
Data confidence
High reliability
The data is strong and the assessment carries high confidence.
Category breakdown
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
Highly processed
Highly processed
Highly processed
Processing indicator kept separate from the nutrition score.
Environmental signal
Weak
32/100
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 broad and consistent. The interpretation is likely to remain stable.
Score drivers
Supports the assessment
Mandatory field coverage is strong (75%).
Impact: medium
Pulls the score down
Declared NOVA group 3 anchors the processing indicator.
Impact: high
A long ingredient list (39 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
Selle toote puhul ei aktiveerunud laste-keskseid riskisignaale. See ei asenda nõustamist; mõju sõltub kogusest, sagedusest ja üldisest toitumismustrist.
