Search catalog

Kavaliauskų bitynas Lietuviškas medus · Nutrisiq

Back to discovery

Kavaliauskų bitynas Lietuviškas medus packshot

Nutrition snapshot

Nutrition interpretation:Moderate signal

Kavaliauskų bitynas Lietuviškas medus

Name: Kavaliauskų bitynas Lietuviškas medus
Brand: Kavaliauskų bitynas
SKU: 4771233049109

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

Nutri-ScoreDNOVA2

Lisaained:0 lisaainet

Andmete katvus:63%

Help improve this record

Improve product data

Explore alternatives

Signal classes

Need attention

High sugar content (74.5 g/100 g) weakens the nutrition score.

What would improve the assessment

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

Supporting factors

Declared NOVA group 2 anchors the processing indicator.

Need attention

Mandatory field coverage is only partial (63%).

Uncertain or missing data

The record is missing an ingredient list.

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

Nutrition

Energy / 100g

324 kcal

Protein / 100g

0.3 g

Sugar / 100g

74.5 g

Nutrition score47/100 · Grade D

Ingredient-level explanation

Ingredients text is not available for this product. Confidence and processing remain cautious because ingredient evidence is missing.

Product & Packaging

CategoryBreakfasts

Label information quality74/100

Data confidence

Processing & Formulation

Processing

Moderately processed

Formulation complexity

NOVA groupNOVA 2

Nutrition score

47/100

0–24

25–44

45–59

60–74

75–100

Nutrition profile

Nutrition score 47/100

Mixed

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

Strongest area

Label quality

Weakest area

Nutrition profile

Data confidence

medium

Data confidence

Medium reliability

medium5/5 kontrollitud

Data coverage is partial and the interpretation carries moderate confidence.

stats.completeness
Kinnitatud
stats.ingredients
Kinnitatud
attributeGroups.processing
Kinnitatud
stats.additives
Kinnitatud
stats.nutriScoreNote
Kinnitatud

Andmekindlus peegeldab tõenduspõhisust ja andmete täielikkust, mitte toote tervislikkust.

Category breakdown

How the separate signals line up

The result is uneven: strengths and weaknesses are balanced.

Nutrition profile

Mixed

47/100

Nutrition score is available, but some inputs were inferred.

Processing

Moderately processed

Processing indicator kept separate from the nutrition score.

Environmental signal

Mixed

57/100

Estimated environmental signal with limited precision.

Label quality

Quite good

74/100

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

Declared NOVA group 2 anchors the processing indicator.
Impact: high

Pulls the score down

High sugar content (74.5 g/100 g) weakens the nutrition score.
Impact: high
Mandatory field coverage is only partial (63%).
Impact: medium

Uncertain area

The record is missing an ingredient list.
Impact: high
Confidence is reduced by missing ingredient evidence.
Impact: high
Record completeness is 44%.
Impact: medium

Some source data is incomplete for this product: sodium per 100g or salt per 100g, fiber per 100g, quantity, ingredients, and allergens. Scores stay visible, but weaker evidence is reflected in the confidence dimension.

Similar options worth comparing

Open Food Facts

6420450040069

Breakfasts. Ingredients: Sucre (origine France), crème de Bretagne (lait), beurre de Bretagne (lait), chocolat noir* Grain de Sal 75% minimum de cacao (cacao*, sucre de canne*, beurre de cacao, fleur de sel, émulsifiant : lécithine de tournesol*) (2,9%), jaune d'œuf, sarrasin toréfié (origine France) (6,1%), épaississant: amidon de maïs modifié, antioxydant : acide ascorbique. * Ingrédient issu de l'agriculture biologique. Evidence quality: high

Nutri-ScoreENOVA4Well-documented label

high confidence from label, nutrition, and source coverage

View product

Riveruud oü

Sumila mesi

Breakfasts. Evidence quality: medium. Nutrition score is currently hidden

NOVA2Lower processing burden

medium confidence from label, nutrition, and source coverage

View product

Open Food Facts

8594071230524

Breakfasts. Evidence quality: medium. Nutrition score is currently hidden

Breakfasts

medium confidence from label, nutrition, and source coverage

View product

Noiseraie

Choco Menthe

Breakfasts. Evidence quality: medium

Nutri-ScoreDPlant-based

medium confidence from label, nutrition, and source coverage

View product

Signal classes

Need attention

High sugar content (74.5 g/100 g) weakens the nutrition score.

What would improve the assessment

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

Supporting factors

Declared NOVA group 2 anchors the processing indicator.

Need attention

Mandatory field coverage is only partial (63%).

Uncertain or missing data

The record is missing an ingredient list.

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

Nutrition

Energy / 100g

324 kcal

Protein / 100g

0.3 g

Sugar / 100g

74.5 g

Nutrition score47/100 · Grade D

Ingredient-level explanation

Ingredients text is not available for this product. Confidence and processing remain cautious because ingredient evidence is missing.

Product & Packaging

CategoryBreakfasts

Label information quality74/100

Data confidence

Processing & Formulation

Processing

Moderately processed

Formulation complexity

NOVA groupNOVA 2

Nutrition score

47/100

0–24

25–44

45–59

60–74

75–100

Nutrition profile

Nutrition score 47/100

Mixed

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

Strongest area

Label quality

Weakest area

Nutrition profile

Data confidence

medium

Data confidence

Medium reliability

medium5/5 kontrollitud

Data coverage is partial and the interpretation carries moderate confidence.

stats.completeness
Kinnitatud
stats.ingredients
Kinnitatud
attributeGroups.processing
Kinnitatud
stats.additives
Kinnitatud
stats.nutriScoreNote
Kinnitatud

Andmekindlus peegeldab tõenduspõhisust ja andmete täielikkust, mitte toote tervislikkust.

Category breakdown

How the separate signals line up

The result is uneven: strengths and weaknesses are balanced.

Nutrition profile

Mixed

47/100

Nutrition score is available, but some inputs were inferred.

Processing

Moderately processed

Processing indicator kept separate from the nutrition score.

Environmental signal

Mixed

57/100

Estimated environmental signal with limited precision.

Label quality

Quite good

74/100

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

Declared NOVA group 2 anchors the processing indicator.
Impact: high

Pulls the score down

High sugar content (74.5 g/100 g) weakens the nutrition score.
Impact: high
Mandatory field coverage is only partial (63%).
Impact: medium

Uncertain area

The record is missing an ingredient list.
Impact: high
Confidence is reduced by missing ingredient evidence.
Impact: high
Record completeness is 44%.
Impact: medium

Kavaliauskų bitynas Lietuviškas medus

Nutrient profile

Need attention

What would improve the assessment

Processing level

Supporting factors

Label quality

Need attention

Uncertain or missing data

Environmental signal

What would improve the assessment

Facts used for scoring

Nutrition

Product & Packaging

Processing & Formulation

Nutrition score 47/100

How the separate signals line up

What shaped the separate signals

Similar options worth comparing

6420450040069

Sumila mesi

8594071230524

Choco Menthe

Kavaliauskų bitynas Lietuviškas medus

Similar options worth comparing

6420450040069

Sumila mesi

8594071230524

Choco Menthe

Nutrient profile

Need attention

What would improve the assessment

Processing level

Supporting factors

Label quality

Need attention

Uncertain or missing data

Environmental signal

What would improve the assessment

Facts used for scoring

Nutrition

Product & Packaging

Processing & Formulation

Nutrition score 47/100

How the separate signals line up

What shaped the separate signals

Environmental Impact

What lowers the rating

Kõrge vabade suhkrute sisaldus

Lapse vaate riskisignaalid

Kõrge vabade suhkrute sisaldus lapse toidus