Search catalog

Lotus Biscoff Smooth · Nutrisiq

Back to discovery

Nutrition snapshot

Nutrition interpretation:High signal

Lotus Biscoff Smooth

Name: Lotus Biscoff Smooth
Brand: Lotus
SKU: 5410126116953

The nutrient profile is weak based on the available evidence.

Nutri-ScoreENOVA4

Lisaained:3 tk

Andmete katvus:83%

Help improve this record

Improve product data

Explore alternatives

Signal classes

Need attention

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

Uncertain or missing data

Fruit, vegetable, legume, and nut share was inferred heuristically.

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 (36 ingredients) supports a more processed classification.

Supporting factors

Mandatory field coverage is strong (88%).

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

Nutrition

Nutrition score25/100 · Grade E

Ingredient-level explanation

Corome suits 58% (wheat flour, sugar, vegetable oils (palm, rapeseed, candy sugar syrup, raising agent (sodium hydrogen carbonate), soya flour, salt, cinnamon, vegetable rapeseed oil, sugar, emulsifier (soya lecithin), acid (citric acid Contains wheat and soya which may cause hypersensitivity.

Tuvastatud lisaained (4)

E322 E322I E330 E500

Product & Packaging

CategoryBreakfasts

Label information quality88/100

Data confidence

Quantity400g

PackagingGlass-jar, Hdpe-lid

Processing & Formulation

Processing

Very highly processed

Formulation complexity

Nutrition score

25/100

0–24

25–44

45–59

60–74

75–100

Nutrition profile

Nutrition score 25/100

Weak

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

High reliability

high5/5 kontrollitud

The data is strong and the assessment carries high 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 profile is on the weaker side and warrants attention.

Nutrition profile

Weak

25/100

Nutrition score is available, but some inputs were inferred.

Processing

Very highly processed

Processing indicator kept separate from the nutrition score.

Environmental signal

Quite good

61/100

Estimated environmental signal with limited precision.

Label quality

Strong

88/100

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

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 (36 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, and nutrition panel. 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

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

Uncertain or missing data

Fruit, vegetable, legume, and nut share was inferred heuristically.

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 (36 ingredients) supports a more processed classification.

Supporting factors

Mandatory field coverage is strong (88%).

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

Nutrition

Nutrition score25/100 · Grade E

Ingredient-level explanation

Tuvastatud lisaained (4)

E322 E322I E330 E500

Product & Packaging

CategoryBreakfasts

Label information quality88/100

Data confidence

Quantity400g

PackagingGlass-jar, Hdpe-lid

Processing & Formulation

Processing

Very highly processed

Formulation complexity

Nutrition score

25/100

0–24

25–44

45–59

60–74

75–100

Nutrition profile

Nutrition score 25/100

Weak

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

High reliability

high5/5 kontrollitud

The data is strong and the assessment carries high 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 profile is on the weaker side and warrants attention.

Nutrition profile

Weak

25/100

Nutrition score is available, but some inputs were inferred.

Processing

Very highly processed

Processing indicator kept separate from the nutrition score.

Environmental signal

Quite good

61/100

Estimated environmental signal with limited precision.

Label quality

Strong

88/100

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

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 (36 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

Lotus Biscoff Smooth

Nutrient profile

Need attention

Uncertain or missing data

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

Nutrition

Product & Packaging

Processing & Formulation

Nutrition score 25/100

How the separate signals line up

What shaped the separate signals

Similar options worth comparing

6420450040069

Sumila mesi

8594071230524

Choco Menthe

Lotus Biscoff Smooth

Similar options worth comparing

6420450040069

Sumila mesi

8594071230524

Choco Menthe

Nutrient profile

Need attention

Uncertain or missing data

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

Nutrition

Product & Packaging

Processing & Formulation

Nutrition score 25/100

How the separate signals line up

What shaped the separate signals

Environmental Impact

What lowers the rating

Ultra-töödeldud toit (NOVA 4)

Lapse vaate riskisignaalid

Ultra-töödeldud profiil (NOVA 4) lapse menüüs