Search catalog

obio chlorella · Nutrisiq

Back to discovery

Nutrition snapshot

Nutrition interpretation:Moderate signal

obio chlorella

Name: obio chlorella
Brand: obio
SKU: 6426333001028

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

Nutri-ScoreCNOVA2

Lisaained:0 lisaainet

Andmete katvus:62%

Help improve this record

Improve product data

Explore alternatives

Signal classes

Supporting factors

Fiber (12.08 g/100 g) supports the nutrition score.

Supporting factors

Declared NOVA group 2 anchors the processing indicator.

Need attention

A long ingredient list (35 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.

Supporting factors

Mandatory field coverage is strong (75%).

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

450 kcal

Protein / 100g

59.1 g

Sugar / 100g

0.8 g

Nutrition score67/100 · Grade C

Ingredient-level explanation

100% chlorella (chlorella pyrenoidosa)* *din agricultură ecologică Mod de administrare: Luaţi 2 tablete de 3 ori pe zi, înainte sau în timpul meselor. Nu depăşiţi doza zilnică recomandată. Păstraţi în loc uscat. Acest produs este un supliment alimentar şi nu înlocuieşte o dietă echilibrată. A nu se lăsa la îndemâna copiilor. Alergeni: conţine sulfiţi care se regăsesc în mod natural în chlorella. Chlorella Obio are peretele celular spart pentru o digerabilitate optimă. Tara de origine: China A se folosi inainte de: Vezi partea din spate jos a ambalajului Distribuitor certificat RO-ECO-008: Bio Holistic SRL Nicolae Beldiceanu 5 Oradea, Bihor, 410002 Romania Tel: 0752.498.740 idi/1042 EXP/12/09/2026 Supliment alimentar notificat la S.N.P.M.A.P.S cu seria: AA10302/17.06.2016 Email: info@bioholistic.ro www.bioholistic.ro Valori nutriţionale / 100g Energie: 1882,7kj/ 450kcal Grăsimi: 13,4g - din care acizi graşi saturați 2,72g Glucide: 17,3g - din care zaharuri 0,8g Proteine: 59,10g Fibre: 12,08g Sare: 0,53g 6426333 001028 A Vă rugăm să reciclaţi acest ambalaj. LDPE

Product & Packaging

CategoryPlant-based

Label information quality72/100

Data confidence

Quantity125 g

Processing & Formulation

Processing

Moderately processed · Limited estimate

Formulation complexity

NOVA group

Nutrition score

67/100

0–24

25–44

45–59

60–74

75–100

Nutrition profile

Nutrition score 67/100

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

67/100

Nutrition score based on nutrient profile only.

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

Quite good

72/100

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 (12.08 g/100 g) supports the nutrition score.
Impact: medium
Mandatory field coverage is strong (75%).
Impact: medium

Pulls the score down

A long ingredient list (35 ingredients) supports a more processed classification.
Impact: low

Uncertain area

Record completeness is 44%.
Impact: medium
The processing indicator is inferred rather than declared directly.
Impact: low

Some source data is incomplete for this product: 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 (12.08 g/100 g) supports the nutrition score.

Supporting factors

Declared NOVA group 2 anchors the processing indicator.

Need attention

A long ingredient list (35 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.

Supporting factors

Mandatory field coverage is strong (75%).

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

450 kcal

Protein / 100g

59.1 g

Sugar / 100g

0.8 g

Nutrition score67/100 · Grade C

Ingredient-level explanation

Product & Packaging

CategoryPlant-based

Label information quality72/100

Data confidence

Quantity125 g

Processing & Formulation

Processing

Moderately processed · Limited estimate

Formulation complexity

NOVA group

Nutrition score

67/100

0–24

25–44

45–59

60–74

75–100

Nutrition profile

Nutrition score 67/100

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

67/100

Nutrition score based on nutrient profile only.

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

Quite good

72/100

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 (12.08 g/100 g) supports the nutrition score.
Impact: medium
Mandatory field coverage is strong (75%).
Impact: medium

Pulls the score down

A long ingredient list (35 ingredients) supports a more processed classification.
Impact: low

Uncertain area

Record completeness is 44%.
Impact: medium
The processing indicator is inferred rather than declared directly.
Impact: low

Some source data is incomplete for this product: allergens and front image. Scores stay visible, but weaker evidence is reflected in the confidence dimension.

obio chlorella

Nutrient profile

Supporting factors

Processing level

Supporting factors

Need attention

Uncertain or missing data

What would improve the assessment

Label quality

Supporting factors

Environmental signal

What would improve the assessment

Facts used for scoring

Nutrition

Product & Packaging

Processing & Formulation

Nutrition score 67/100

How the separate signals line up

What shaped the separate signals

Similar options worth comparing

Jugu sitruuna

Pickled onions

6412000016389

Sauerkraut soup vegan

obio chlorella

Similar options worth comparing

Jugu sitruuna

Pickled onions

6412000016389

Sauerkraut soup vegan

Nutrient profile

Supporting factors

Processing level

Supporting factors

Need attention

Uncertain or missing data

What would improve the assessment

Label quality

Supporting factors

Environmental signal

What would improve the assessment

Facts used for scoring

Nutrition

Product & Packaging

Processing & Formulation

Nutrition score 67/100

How the separate signals line up

What shaped the separate signals

Environmental Impact

What lowers the rating

Lapse vaate riskisignaalid