Search catalog

crispy goodies bavete cu semințe și tărâțe · Nutrisiq

Back to discovery

crispy goodies bavete cu semințe și tărâțe packshot

Nutrition snapshot

Nutrition interpretation:Moderate signal

crispy goodies bavete cu semințe și tărâțe

Name: crispy goodies bavete cu semințe și tărâțe
Brand: crispy goodies
SKU: 6422310001647

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

Nutri-ScoreCNOVA3

Lisaained:4 tk

Andmete katvus:74%

Help improve this record

Improve product data

Explore alternatives

Signal classes

Supporting factors

Fiber (7.2 g/100 g) supports the nutrition score.

Need attention

High sodium content (800 mg/100 g) weakens the nutrition score.
Added sugars are unavailable, so sugar handling relies conservatively on total sugars.
Core nutrient evidence is incomplete, so the nutrition score is unavailable.

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 3 anchors the processing indicator.
A long ingredient list (24 ingredients) supports a more processed classification.

Supporting factors

Mandatory field coverage is strong (100%).

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

Protein / 100g

10.8 g

Sugar / 100g

3.2 g

Nutrition score65/100 · Grade C

Ingredient-level explanation

faina de grau tip 660, ulei de palmier, semințe în proporție variabila 9%(in, susan, mac, chimen,), tărâțe de grâu 4.5%, drojdie, extract de malț, sare iodata 2%, antioxidanți(acid citric, eritorbat de sodiu), conservant (sorbat de potasiu), corector de aciditate (E524). Conține gluten de grâu și susas.

Tuvastatud lisaained (4)

E202 E316 E330 E524

Product & Packaging

CategoryFood

Label information quality78/100

Data confidence

Quantity120 g

Packagingen:Plastic

OriginsRomânia

Processing & Formulation

Processing

Highly processed

Nutrition score

65/100

0–24

25–44

45–59

60–74

75–100

Nutrition profile

Nutrition score 65/100

Quite good

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 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

Processing indicator kept separate from the nutrition score.

Environmental signal

Mixed

51/100

Estimated environmental signal with limited precision.

Label quality

Strong

78/100

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

Fiber (7.2 g/100 g) supports the nutrition score.
Impact: medium
Mandatory field coverage is strong (100%).
Impact: medium

Pulls the score down

Declared NOVA group 3 anchors the processing indicator.
Impact: high
High sodium content (800 mg/100 g) weakens the nutrition score.
Impact: medium
A long ingredient list (24 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
Record completeness is 78%.
Impact: medium

Some source data is incomplete for this product: energy per 100g and saturated fat per 100g. Scores stay visible, but weaker evidence is reflected in the confidence dimension.

Similar options worth comparing

Nestlé

NAN PRO 2

Food. Ingredients: Vatten, skum - mjölk, laktos (mjölk), vegetabi - liska oljor (sotros, raps), avsaltat vasslepulver (mjölk), vassleper - meat (mjölk), 2-fukosyllaktos/ difukosyllaktosblandning, lakto-N - tetraos (med laktos), 3'-sialyl - laktosnatriumsalt, 6-sialyllaktos - natriumsalt, olja från mikroalgen Schizochytrium sp., emulgerings - medel (sojalecitin). L-fenylalanin. L-isoleucin, L-leucin, L-tryptofan, L-histidin, L-threonin, L-valin, mineralämnen (natrium, kalium, kalcium, järn, magnesium, zink, jod koppar, mangan, selen), vitaminer (A DEK.C, tiamin, niacin, B folsyra, Biz biotin, pantotensyral.. Evidence quality: high. Nutrition score is currently hidden

NOVA4Well-documented label

high confidence from label, nutrition, and source coverage

View product

Muru baby

6430067350789

Food. Ingredients: Maissijauho (82 %), auringonkukkaöljy, tomaattijauhe (8%), oregano, hapettumisenestoaine (tokoferoliuute), tiamiini.. Evidence quality: high

Nutri-ScoreCNOVA3Well-documented label

high confidence from label, nutrition, and source coverage

View product

Open Food Facts

Milupa

Food. Evidence quality: medium

Nutri-ScoreCWell-documented label

medium confidence from label, nutrition, and source coverage

View product

Open Food Facts

8445290832900

Food. Ingredients: Tomaattisose* 29%, vesi, porkkana* 15%, kesäkurpitsa* 12%, peruna* 12%, kikherne* 7,7%, kaurahiutale* 3,9%, rypsiöljy*, oregano*. *Luomuraaka-aine. Sisältää 56% kasviksia.. Evidence quality: high. Nutrition score is currently hidden

NOVA1Lower processing burden

high confidence from label, nutrition, and source coverage

View product

Signal classes

Supporting factors

Fiber (7.2 g/100 g) supports the nutrition score.

Need attention

High sodium content (800 mg/100 g) weakens the nutrition score.
Added sugars are unavailable, so sugar handling relies conservatively on total sugars.
Core nutrient evidence is incomplete, so the nutrition score is unavailable.

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 3 anchors the processing indicator.
A long ingredient list (24 ingredients) supports a more processed classification.

Supporting factors

Mandatory field coverage is strong (100%).

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

Protein / 100g

10.8 g

Sugar / 100g

3.2 g

Nutrition score65/100 · Grade C

Ingredient-level explanation

Tuvastatud lisaained (4)

E202 E316 E330 E524

Product & Packaging

CategoryFood

Label information quality78/100

Data confidence

Quantity120 g

Packagingen:Plastic

OriginsRomânia

Processing & Formulation

Processing

Highly processed

Nutrition score

65/100

0–24

25–44

45–59

60–74

75–100

Nutrition profile

Nutrition score 65/100

Quite good

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 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

Processing indicator kept separate from the nutrition score.

Environmental signal

Mixed

51/100

Estimated environmental signal with limited precision.

Label quality

Strong

78/100

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

Fiber (7.2 g/100 g) supports the nutrition score.
Impact: medium
Mandatory field coverage is strong (100%).
Impact: medium

Pulls the score down

Declared NOVA group 3 anchors the processing indicator.
Impact: high
High sodium content (800 mg/100 g) weakens the nutrition score.
Impact: medium
A long ingredient list (24 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
Record completeness is 78%.
Impact: medium

Some source data is incomplete for this product: energy per 100g and saturated fat per 100g. Scores stay visible, but weaker evidence is reflected in the confidence dimension.

crispy goodies bavete cu semințe și tărâțe

Nutrient profile

Supporting factors

Need attention

What would improve the assessment

Processing level

Need attention

Label quality

Supporting factors

Environmental signal

What would improve the assessment

Facts used for scoring

Nutrition

Product & Packaging

Processing & Formulation

Nutrition score 65/100

How the separate signals line up

What shaped the separate signals

Similar options worth comparing

NAN PRO 2

6430067350789

Milupa

8445290832900

crispy goodies bavete cu semințe și tărâțe

Similar options worth comparing

NAN PRO 2

6430067350789

Milupa

8445290832900

Nutrient profile

Supporting factors

Need attention

What would improve the assessment

Processing level

Need attention

Label quality

Supporting factors

Environmental signal

What would improve the assessment

Facts used for scoring

Nutrition

Product & Packaging

Processing & Formulation

Nutrition score 65/100

How the separate signals line up

What shaped the separate signals

Environmental Impact

What lowers the rating

Kõrge soolasisaldus

Lapse vaate riskisignaalid

Kõrge soolasisaldus lapse menüüs