Search catalog

Open Food Facts Pain noir · Nutrisiq

Back to discovery

Nutrition snapshot

Nutrition interpretation:Low signal

Open Food Facts Pain noir

Name: Open Food Facts Pain noir
Brand: Open Food Facts
SKU: 6421882000324

The nutrient profile looks comparatively strong based on the available evidence.

Nutri-ScoreANOVA2

Lisaained:0 lisaainet

Andmete katvus:51%

Help improve this record

Improve product data

Explore alternatives

Signal classes

Supporting factors

Fiber (5 g/100 g) supports the nutrition score.

Need attention

Added sugars are unavailable, so sugar handling relies conservatively on total sugars.

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

A long ingredient list (22 ingredients) supports a more processed classification.

Uncertain or missing data

The processing indicator is inferred rather than declared directly.

What would improve the assessment

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

Need attention

Mandatory field coverage is only partial (63%).

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

209 kcal

Protein / 100g

5.92 g

Sugar / 100g

2.5 g

Nutrition score78/100 · Grade A

Ingredient-level explanation

Făină albă de grâu tip 650, 17% maia (apǎ, fainǎ albă de grâu tip 650), 12.7% faină neagră de grâu tip 1250, fulgi de cartofi, tărâţă de grâu, drojdie, sare iodată, făină fermentată de grâu, enzime de prospețime, decor (fulgi de ovǎz, seminţe de in, semințe de floarea soarelui). Poate conţine urme de: soia, lapte şi produse derate, fructe cu coajă lemnoasă Tara de origine a făinii: România. A se păstra în spații curate, uscate, ferite de razele soarelui, la temperatura de maxim 22°C. A se consuma de prerinţă înainte de data marcată pe clips

Product & Packaging

CategoryPlant-based

Label information quality57/100

Data confidence

Processing & Formulation

Processing

Moderately processed · Limited estimate

Formulation complexity

NOVA groupNOVA 2

Nutrition score

78/100

0–24

25–44

45–59

60–74

75–100

Nutrition profile

Nutrition score 78/100

Strong

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

Strongest area

Nutrition profile

Weakest area

Label quality

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 strong and supports a positive overall assessment.

Nutrition profile

Strong

78/100

Nutrition score is available, but some inputs were inferred.

Processing

Moderately processed

Moderately processed · Limited estimate

Moderately processed

Processing indicator is available, but part of the classification is inferred.

Environmental signal

Quite good

72/100

Estimated environmental signal with limited precision.

Label quality

Mixed

57/100

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
Fiber (5 g/100 g) supports the nutrition score.
Impact: medium

Pulls the score down

Mandatory field coverage is only partial (63%).
Impact: medium
A long ingredient list (22 ingredients) supports a more processed classification.
Impact: low

Uncertain area

Record completeness is 33%.
Impact: medium
The processing indicator is inferred rather than declared directly.
Impact: low
Image evidence covers about 0% of the key fields.
Impact: low

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

Similar options worth comparing

Elovena

Jugu sitruuna

Plant-based. Ingredients: Kaurapohja (vesi, gluteeniton kaura 8%), sokeri, sitruuna 4,2% (tiivisteestä), tärkkelys (peruna, maissi), rapsiöljy, sakeuttamisaineet (pektiini, gellaanikumi), sitruskuitu, perunaproteiini, kalsium, happamuudensäätöaine (natriumsitraatti), väri (beetakaroteeni, paprikaväri), suola, aromit, vitamiinit (B2, B12, D2), hapate. Gluteeniton, maidoton, vegaaninen.. Evidence quality: high

Nutri-ScoreCNOVA4Well-documented label

high confidence from label, nutrition, and source coverage

View product

First Price

Pickled onions

Plant-based. Evidence quality: medium

Nutri-ScoreCPlant-based

medium confidence from label, nutrition, and source coverage

View product

Saarioinen

6412000016389

Plant-based. Ingredients: Sokeri, mansikka, vesi, sakeuttamisaine (E440), happa muudensäätöaine (E 330), säilöntäaine (E 202). 100 g tuotetta sisältää 35 g marjaa.. Evidence quality: high

Nutri-ScoreDNOVA4Well-documented label

high confidence from label, nutrition, and source coverage

View product

Salvest

Sauerkraut soup vegan

Plant-based. Ingredients: Hapukapsas (48%), kartul, porgand, odrakruup, sibul, rapsiöli, sool, suhkur, maitsetaimed, vürtsid.. Evidence quality: high

Nutri-ScoreCNOVA3Well-documented label

high confidence from label, nutrition, and source coverage

View product

Signal classes

Supporting factors

Fiber (5 g/100 g) supports the nutrition score.

Need attention

Added sugars are unavailable, so sugar handling relies conservatively on total sugars.

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

A long ingredient list (22 ingredients) supports a more processed classification.

Uncertain or missing data

The processing indicator is inferred rather than declared directly.

What would improve the assessment

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

Need attention

Mandatory field coverage is only partial (63%).

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

209 kcal

Protein / 100g

5.92 g

Sugar / 100g

2.5 g

Nutrition score78/100 · Grade A

Ingredient-level explanation

Product & Packaging

CategoryPlant-based

Label information quality57/100

Data confidence

Processing & Formulation

Processing

Moderately processed · Limited estimate

Formulation complexity

NOVA groupNOVA 2

Nutrition score

78/100

0–24

25–44

45–59

60–74

75–100

Nutrition profile

Nutrition score 78/100

Strong

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

Strongest area

Nutrition profile

Weakest area

Label quality

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 strong and supports a positive overall assessment.

Nutrition profile

Strong

78/100

Nutrition score is available, but some inputs were inferred.

Processing

Moderately processed

Moderately processed · Limited estimate

Moderately processed

Processing indicator is available, but part of the classification is inferred.

Environmental signal

Quite good

72/100

Estimated environmental signal with limited precision.

Label quality

Mixed

57/100

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
Fiber (5 g/100 g) supports the nutrition score.
Impact: medium

Pulls the score down

Mandatory field coverage is only partial (63%).
Impact: medium
A long ingredient list (22 ingredients) supports a more processed classification.
Impact: low

Uncertain area

Record completeness is 33%.
Impact: medium
The processing indicator is inferred rather than declared directly.
Impact: low
Image evidence covers about 0% of the key fields.
Impact: low

Open Food Facts Pain noir

Nutrient profile

Supporting factors

Need attention

What would improve the assessment

Processing level

Supporting factors

Need attention

Uncertain or missing data

What would improve the assessment

Label quality

Need attention

Environmental signal

What would improve the assessment

Facts used for scoring

Nutrition

Product & Packaging

Processing & Formulation

Nutrition score 78/100

How the separate signals line up

What shaped the separate signals

Similar options worth comparing

Jugu sitruuna

Pickled onions

6412000016389

Sauerkraut soup vegan

Open Food Facts Pain noir

Similar options worth comparing

Jugu sitruuna

Pickled onions

6412000016389

Sauerkraut soup vegan

Nutrient profile

Supporting factors

Need attention

What would improve the assessment

Processing level

Supporting factors

Need attention

Uncertain or missing data

What would improve the assessment

Label quality

Need attention

Environmental signal

What would improve the assessment

Facts used for scoring

Nutrition

Product & Packaging

Processing & Formulation

Nutrition score 78/100

How the separate signals line up

What shaped the separate signals

Environmental Impact

What lowers the rating

Lapse vaate riskisignaalid