No photo

sweet chilli stir fry sauce

Unknown brand

4088600144207

Processing

Ultra-processed

Group 4 of 4 on the NOVA scale

Additives listed

None we have assessed

Counted from the label, not by quantity

Sugars per 100g

24.23g

High

UK FSA front of pack threshold

Three separate readings, kept apart on purpose. This is not a score, and none of it says this product is harmful.

Additives

No additives listed in the source data for this product. That can mean it genuinely has none, or that the entry is incomplete. The pack itself is the authority.

Ingredients

water, sugar, rice wine vinegar, cornflour, tomato purée, red chilli (2%), ginger, garlic, salt. allergy advice:may contain sesame. dietary advice: suitable for vegetarians. no artificial colours, flavourings or preservatives. nutrition typical (as sold energy fat of which satura carbohydrate of which suga fibre protein salt use by: see fi storage: ke once opened, and by te str if you are now return it to th will be please this does not [11

As printed on the pack, in the producer's own order: ingredients are listed by weight, so what comes first is most of what is in it. E numbers link to their assessment where we have one.

Processing level

NOVA group 4: Ultra-processed

Industrial formulations with additives, isolates and ingredients you would not cook with at home. The strongest modern evidence links high intake of these to poorer health outcomes.

Nutrients per 100g

Fat

0.19g

Low

Saturates

0.02g

Low

Sugars

24.23g

High

Salt

0.03g

Low

These figures are estimated from the ingredients rather than read off the packaging, so treat the bands as approximate. The pack is the authority.

Judged on the UK FSA front of pack thresholds for solid foods. A dash means the source has no figure, which is not the same as a low one.

Where this came from

Product data from Open Food Facts, which is crowd sourced and can be incomplete or out of date. Our copy is from 17 August 2026: Open Food Facts is checked every night, and a product is rewritten only when its record there has changed, so an older date means the source has not moved rather than that we stopped looking. Something wrong? Correcting it at the source fixes it here and everywhere else that uses the same data. If the problem is one of our additive assessments, tell us.

Scan another barcode Search