Search catalog

Kraft dressing · Nutrisiq

Back to discovery

Nutrition snapshot

Nutrition interpretation:Signal unavailable

Kraft dressing

Name: Kraft dressing
Brand: Kraft
SKU: 64133737

Nutrition scoring is unavailable because core nutrient evidence is incomplete.

NOVA4

Lisaained:4 tk

Andmete katvus:60%

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

Nutrition scoring needs a fuller nutrient panel, especially energy, sugars, saturated fat, sodium or salt, and fiber.

Need attention

Declared NOVA group 4 anchors the processing indicator.
Formulation markers such as ksantaankummi support a more processed classification.
A long ingredient list (29 ingredients) supports a more processed classification.

Need attention

Mandatory field coverage is only partial (63%).

Uncertain or missing data

The record is missing a nutrition panel.

Supporting factors

Declared Eco-Score D supports the environmental indicator.

Structured source data

Facts used for scoring

Nutrition

Nutrition scoreInsufficient evidence

Ingredient-level explanation

vinegar, water, blend of vegetable oils (soybean oil, canola oil), sugar, salt, garlic*, contains less than 2% of red bell peppers*, onions*, xanthan gum, spice, oleoresin paprika (color), potassium sorbate and calcium disodium edta (to protect flavor), *dried kraft heinz foods company chicago, il 60601 kraftheinz ©kraft foods refrigerate

Tuvastatud lisaained (4)

E160C E202 E385 E415

Product & Packaging

CategoryCondiments

Label information quality66/100

Data confidence

Processing & Formulation

Processing

Very highly processed

Formulation complexity

NOVA groupNOVA 4

Nutrition score

—/100

0–24

25–44

45–59

60–74

75–100

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

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 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

Weak

35/100

Product-specific environmental signal.

Label quality

Quite good

66/100

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 Eco-Score D supports the environmental indicator.
Impact: high

Pulls the score down

Declared NOVA group 4 anchors the processing indicator.
Impact: high
Mandatory field coverage is only partial (63%).
Impact: medium
Formulation markers such as ksantaankummi support 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, quantity, nutrition panel, and front image. Scores stay visible, but weaker evidence is reflected in the confidence dimension.

Similar options worth comparing

Pronat

Garam Masala condment Eco

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

Condiments

medium confidence from label, nutrition, and source coverage

View product

Open Food Facts

6410405153289

Condiments. Ingredients: Punainen chili (30 %), sitruunaruoho, valkosipuli, salottisipuli, suola, kaffirlimetinlehti, mausteet (korianteri, juustokumina), galangajuuri, happamuudensäätöaine (sitruunahappo). Evidence quality: high

Nutri-ScoreENOVA3Well-documented label

high confidence from label, nutrition, and source coverage

View product

K-Classic

Pasta sauce Mascarpone e rucola

Condiments. Ingredients: Pjaustyti pomidorai 52,3%, pomidorų sultys 17,4%, mascarpone sūris 14% (pienas, grietinėlė, rūgštingumą reguliuojanti medžiaga E330), pomidorų pasta 11%, gražgarstės 1,5%, cukrus, raudonieji svogūnai, druska, ypač tyras alyvuogių aliejus, rūgštingumą reguliuojanti medžiaga E330, baltieji pipirai. 100 g produkto maistingumas: energinė verte 309 kJ/ 74 kcal, riebalai 4,2 g, iš kurių sočiųjų riebalų rūgščių 2,7 g, angliavandeniai 6,2 g, iš kurių cukrų 5,5 g, skaidulinės medžiagos 1,5 g, baltymai 2,1 g, druska 1,2 g.. Evidence quality: medium

Nutri-ScoreCNOVA2Lower processing burden

medium confidence from label, nutrition, and source coverage

View product

Open Food Facts

20254124

Condiments. Ingredients: Garstyčios. Sudedamosios dalys: geriamasis vanduo, baltųjų garstyčiu solos, spirito actas, cukrus, rudųjų garstyčių sėklos, valgomoji druska, prieskoniai, karamelizuoto cukraus sirupas.. Evidence quality: medium

Nutri-ScoreDNOVA2Lower processing burden

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

Nutrition scoring needs a fuller nutrient panel, especially energy, sugars, saturated fat, sodium or salt, and fiber.

Need attention

Declared NOVA group 4 anchors the processing indicator.
Formulation markers such as ksantaankummi support a more processed classification.
A long ingredient list (29 ingredients) supports a more processed classification.

Need attention

Mandatory field coverage is only partial (63%).

Uncertain or missing data

The record is missing a nutrition panel.

Supporting factors

Declared Eco-Score D supports the environmental indicator.

Structured source data

Facts used for scoring

Nutrition

Nutrition scoreInsufficient evidence

Ingredient-level explanation

Tuvastatud lisaained (4)

E160C E202 E385 E415

Product & Packaging

CategoryCondiments

Label information quality66/100

Data confidence

Processing & Formulation

Processing

Very highly processed

Formulation complexity

NOVA groupNOVA 4

Nutrition score

—/100

0–24

25–44

45–59

60–74

75–100

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

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 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

Weak

35/100

Product-specific environmental signal.

Label quality

Quite good

66/100

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 Eco-Score D supports the environmental indicator.
Impact: high

Pulls the score down

Declared NOVA group 4 anchors the processing indicator.
Impact: high
Mandatory field coverage is only partial (63%).
Impact: medium
Formulation markers such as ksantaankummi support 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

Kraft dressing

Nutrient profile

Need attention

Uncertain or missing data

What would improve the assessment

Processing level

Need attention

Label quality

Need attention

Uncertain or missing data

Environmental signal

Supporting factors

Facts used for scoring

Nutrition

Product & Packaging

Processing & Formulation

No nutrition score

How the separate signals line up

What shaped the separate signals

Similar options worth comparing

Garam Masala condment Eco

6410405153289

Pasta sauce Mascarpone e rucola

20254124

Kraft dressing

Similar options worth comparing

Garam Masala condment Eco

6410405153289

Pasta sauce Mascarpone e rucola

20254124

Nutrient profile

Need attention

Uncertain or missing data

What would improve the assessment

Processing level

Need attention

Label quality

Need attention

Uncertain or missing data

Environmental signal

Supporting factors

Facts used for scoring

Nutrition

Product & Packaging

Processing & Formulation

No nutrition score

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