Search catalog

Salliselta Kuorittu maapähkinä · Nutrisiq

Back to discovery

Nutrition snapshot

Nutrition interpretation:Moderate signal

Salliselta Kuorittu maapähkinä

Name: Salliselta Kuorittu maapähkinä
Brand: Salliselta
SKU: 6436501043576

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

Nutri-ScoreCNOVA2

Lisaained:0 lisaainet

Andmete katvus:67%

Help improve this record

Improve product data

Explore alternatives

Signal classes

Supporting factors

Fiber (15.8 g/100 g) supports the nutrition score.

Need attention

High saturated fat (6.3 g/100 g) weakens the nutrition score.

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.

Supporting factors

Declared NOVA group 2 anchors the processing indicator.

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 (88%).

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

568 kcal

Protein / 100g

25.6 g

Sugar / 100g

6.9 g

Nutrition score58/100 · Grade C

Ingredient-level explanation

Maapähkinä Ingredienser: jordnöt Ingredients: peanut Koostis: maapähkel

Product & Packaging

CategoryPlant-based

Label information quality93/100

Data confidence

Quantity250 g

PackagingPlastic,Bag

OriginsArgentina

Processing & Formulation

Processing

Moderately processed · Limited estimate

Nutrition score

58/100

0–24

25–44

45–59

60–74

75–100

Nutrition profile

Nutrition score 58/100

Mixed

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

Strongest area

Label quality

Weakest area

Nutrition profile

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 uneven: strengths and weaknesses are balanced.

Nutrition profile

Mixed

58/100

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

74/100

Estimated environmental signal with limited precision.

Label quality

Strong

93/100

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 (15.8 g/100 g) supports the nutrition score.
Impact: medium
Mandatory field coverage is strong (88%).
Impact: medium

Pulls the score down

High saturated fat (6.3 g/100 g) weakens the nutrition score.
Impact: medium

Uncertain area

Record completeness is 78%.
Impact: medium
The processing indicator is inferred rather than declared directly.
Impact: low
Source provenance supports confidence.
Impact: low

Some source data is incomplete for this product: allergens. 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 (15.8 g/100 g) supports the nutrition score.

Need attention

High saturated fat (6.3 g/100 g) weakens the nutrition score.

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.

Supporting factors

Declared NOVA group 2 anchors the processing indicator.

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 (88%).

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

568 kcal

Protein / 100g

25.6 g

Sugar / 100g

6.9 g

Nutrition score58/100 · Grade C

Ingredient-level explanation

Maapähkinä Ingredienser: jordnöt Ingredients: peanut Koostis: maapähkel

Product & Packaging

CategoryPlant-based

Label information quality93/100

Data confidence

Quantity250 g

PackagingPlastic,Bag

OriginsArgentina

Processing & Formulation

Processing

Moderately processed · Limited estimate

Nutrition score

58/100

0–24

25–44

45–59

60–74

75–100

Nutrition profile

Nutrition score 58/100

Mixed

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

Strongest area

Label quality

Weakest area

Nutrition profile

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 uneven: strengths and weaknesses are balanced.

Nutrition profile

Mixed

58/100

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

74/100

Estimated environmental signal with limited precision.

Label quality

Strong

93/100

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 (15.8 g/100 g) supports the nutrition score.
Impact: medium
Mandatory field coverage is strong (88%).
Impact: medium

Pulls the score down

High saturated fat (6.3 g/100 g) weakens the nutrition score.
Impact: medium

Uncertain area

Record completeness is 78%.
Impact: medium
The processing indicator is inferred rather than declared directly.
Impact: low
Source provenance supports confidence.
Impact: low

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

Salliselta Kuorittu maapähkinä

Nutrient profile

Supporting factors

Need attention

Uncertain or missing data

What would improve the assessment

Processing level

Supporting factors

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 58/100

How the separate signals line up

What shaped the separate signals

Similar options worth comparing

Jugu sitruuna

Pickled onions

6412000016389

Sauerkraut soup vegan

Salliselta Kuorittu maapähkinä

Similar options worth comparing

Jugu sitruuna

Pickled onions

6412000016389

Sauerkraut soup vegan

Nutrient profile

Supporting factors

Need attention

Uncertain or missing data

What would improve the assessment

Processing level

Supporting factors

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 58/100

How the separate signals line up

What shaped the separate signals

Environmental Impact

What lowers the rating

Kõrge vabade suhkrute sisaldus

Kõrge küllastunud rasva sisaldus

Lapse vaate riskisignaalid

Suhkruga joogid lapse puhul

Kõrge küllastunud rasva taustsignaal