Our verdict
Is DOGS ENERGY Rind a good dog food?
We score it 77/100 (Good). This reflects the ingredient quality, composition and label transparency of the recipe as declared on the label.
Who is this food for?
Suits
- Labelled by the manufacturer for all lifestages
- Doesn't list chicken, beef, turkey, lamb, fish, venison, pork, duck as ingredients
Consider something else if:
- Your dog avoids grain: the label lists rice - white
These points are derived from declared ingredients and analysis, not a substitute for veterinary advice. If your dog has a diagnosed condition, food choice is a medical nutrition decision: speak to your vet. Find foods that fit your dog.
Ingredients (16)8 of 16 percentages printed
Estimated composition
- meat 60.0%
- veg 28.0%
- carb 5.0%
- unknown 4.5%
- supplement 2.5%
| # | As declared | Matched | Label reading | Declared % | Est. % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 60% Muscle Meat | Muscle Meat | meat · good | 60 | 60.0 |
| 2 | Heart | Heart | meat · good | - | 0.0 |
| 3 | Liver | Liver | meat · good | - | 0.0 |
| 4 | Lung | Lung | meat · medium | - | 0.0 |
| 5 | 12% Carrots | Carrots | veg · good | 12 | 12.0 |
| 6 | 6% Broccoli | Broccoli | veg · good | 6 | 6.0 |
| 7 | 4.5% Natural Rice | Rice - white | carb · medium | 4.5 | 4.5 |
| 8 | 5% Potatoes | Potatoes | carb · medium | 5 | 5.0 |
| 9 | 5% Apple | Apples | veg · good | 5 | 5.0 |
| 10 | 5% Zucchini | Courgette | veg · good | 5 | 5.0 |
| 11 | 2.5% Eggshell Powder | Crushed Eggshells | supplement · good | 2.5 | 2.5 |
| 12 | Mineral Clay | Mineral Clay | mineral · good | - | 0.0 |
| 13 | Parsley | Parsley | veg · good | - | 0.0 |
| 14 | Seaweed/Spirulina | Spirulina | veg · good | - | 0.0 |
| 15 | Cold-Pressed Sunflower Oil | Sunflower oil | oil · good | - | 0.0 |
| 16 | Andean Salt | Andean salt | supplement · medium | - | 0.0 |
- 1. 60% Muscle Meat60% declared60.0% estimated
- 2. Heart0.0% estimated
- 3. Liver0.0% estimated
- 4. Lung0.0% estimated
- 5. 12% Carrots12% declared12.0% estimated
- 6. 6% Broccoli6% declared6.0% estimated
- 7. 4.5% Natural Rice4.5% declared4.5% estimated
- 8. 5% Potatoes5% declared5.0% estimated
- 9. 5% Apple5% declared5.0% estimated
- 10. 5% Zucchini5% declared5.0% estimated
- 11. 2.5% Eggshell Powder2.5% declared2.5% estimated
- 12. Mineral Clay0.0% estimated
- 13. Parsley0.0% estimated
- 14. Seaweed/Spirulina0.0% estimated
- 15. Cold-Pressed Sunflower Oil0.0% estimated
- 16. Andean Salt0.0% estimated
Nutrition and feedingProtein 11.90% · Fat 5.40%
Declared analysis (as fed)
| Nutrient | As fed |
|---|---|
| Protein | 11.90% |
| Fat | 5.40% |
| Fibre | 0.80% |
| Ash | 2.10% |
| Moisture | 75.50% |
| Carbohydrates | 2.60% |
| Calcium | 0.22% |
| Phosphorus | 0.18% |
Additives & feeding info
Feeding and storage
Storage
Geöffnete Dosen kühl aufbewahren.
Feeding guide
Aktiver Hund 3–3,5% / Übergewichtiger, träger Hund 2–2,5% / Hund im Wachstum 4–4,5% des Körpergewichts; nur zimmerwarm füttern, frisches Trinkwasser bereitstellen.
No additives recorded yet.
Trust and sourceNo recalls recorded in our database · checked 2026-09-19
Brand and contact: DOGS ENERGY
- Website
- https://www.dogs-energy.de/
- Phone
- 0821 27 23 99 96
- Address
- Augsburg
Trust and provenance
- Recall history
- No recalls recorded in our database
- Label data last checked
- 2026-09-19
- Scored with
- Model v3 (methodology)
- Product page
- www.dogs-energy.de
Recall history is presentation-only and never affects the score. Dates are when we recorded the data, not when the manufacturer last changed the recipe.
Brand and retailer reviews
External platform ratings are not scores for this individual recipe.
Trustpilot: 4.8/5 · 2,625 reviews
Spotted a mistake in this listing? Report it here and we'll take a look.
Score details and methodologyCalculations, history and evidence
Recipe: how the 1-100 score is calculated
Why this score?
This food scores 77 out of 100. The overall quality of the ingredient list contributed +6.8 points, and the meat content added +6 points. Working against it, the processing format contributed -0.7 points and the carbohydrate content contributed -0.5 points.
Scored with model v3 on 2026-10-25. Each component is the feature value for this product multiplied by the model's published coefficient.
| Component | Input | Coefficient | Contribution |
|---|---|---|---|
| Base score | - | 30.909 | +30.91 |
| Average ingredient quality | 0.7 | 9.191 | +6.82 |
| Meat share of dry matter | 62.7% | 0.096 | +6.02 |
| Carb share of dry matter | 4.7% | -0.115 | -0.54 |
| Vegetable share of dry matter | 15.7% | -0.005 | -0.08 |
| Supplement share of dry matter | 8.6% | -0.012 | -0.10 |
| Unrecognised share of dry matter | 8.4% | -0.027 | -0.22 |
| High meat (30%+ of dry matter) | yes | 0.707 | +0.71 |
| Processing multiplier | 1.00 | 33.786 | +33.79 |
| Processing: Fresh Shelf | yes | -0.672 | -0.67 |
Show all 40 components
| Component | Input | Coefficient | Contribution |
|---|---|---|---|
| Base score | - | 30.909 | +30.91 |
| Average ingredient quality | 0.7 | 9.191 | +6.82 |
| Meat share of dry matter | 62.7% | 0.096 | +6.02 |
| Carb share of dry matter | 4.7% | -0.115 | -0.54 |
| Oil share of dry matter | 0.0% | -0.092 | +0.00 |
| Vegetable share of dry matter | 15.7% | -0.005 | -0.08 |
| Additive share of dry matter | 0.0% | 0.163 | +0.00 |
| Supplement share of dry matter | 8.6% | -0.012 | -0.10 |
| Other share of dry matter | 0.0% | -0.375 | +0.00 |
| Unrecognised share of dry matter | 8.4% | -0.027 | -0.22 |
| Recipe graded poor | 0.0% | -0.065 | +0.00 |
| Poor-quality meat in recipe | 0.0% | -0.179 | +0.00 |
| Number of poor ingredients | 0 | -0.876 | +0.00 |
| Largest single poor ingredient | 0.0% | 0.060 | +0.00 |
| Undeclared quantities | 0.0% | -0.106 | +0.00 |
| Prints ingredient percentages | no | 0.000 | +0.00 |
| Complete diet | no | 2.294 | +0.00 |
| Frozen or chilled fresh | no | 0.000 | +0.00 |
| High meat (30%+ of dry matter) | yes | 0.707 | +0.71 |
| Low meat (under 10% of dry matter) | no | -3.158 | +0.00 |
| High carb and low meat | no | -1.180 | +0.00 |
| Meat share × printed percentages | 0.0 | 0.000 | +0.00 |
| Meat share × fresh | 0.0 | 0.000 | +0.00 |
| Fresh × high meat | 0.0 | 11.084 | +0.00 |
| Additive penalty | -0.02 | 0.222 | -0.00 |
| Processing multiplier | 1.00 | 33.786 | +33.79 |
| Processing: Raw | no | -0.054 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Fresh Chilled | no | -2.354 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Fresh Frozen | no | -2.354 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Fresh Refrigerated | no | 0.000 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Fresh Shelf | yes | -0.672 | -0.67 |
| Processing: Dry Freeze Dried | no | 6.629 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Dry Air Dried | no | 6.331 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Dry Cold Pressed | no | -6.713 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Dry Baked | no | -6.713 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Dry Extruded | no | -6.713 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Dry Semi Moist | no | -6.174 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Dry Muesli | no | -10.146 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Wet Pate | no | -0.672 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Wet Chunks | no | -0.672 | +0.00 |
- Processing-type offset
- -0.08
- Subtotal
- 76.5
- Final score
- 77/100
Contributions are rounded to two decimals, so they may not sum exactly to the subtotal. The full coefficient table is published on the methodology page.
Nutritional: declared analysis vs reference ranges
How the declared analysis compares with FEDIAF reference ranges for adult dogs. The label prints as-fed values; we convert to a dry-matter basis before scoring, and the bands are dry-matter ranges. Scores rise to 100 at the band midpoint: the reference is adequacy, not maximisation. Nutrients with a published upper limit taper again above it; fat is policed through calorie density rather than a direct penalty.
| Nutrient | As fed (label) | Dry matter (scored) | Score |
|---|---|---|---|
| Protein | 11.9 | 48.6 (band 18 to 40%) | 100 |
| Fat | 5.4 | 22 (band 5.5 to 20%) | 100 |
| Fibre | 0.8 | 3.3 (band 0.5 to 5%) | 100 |
| Calcium | 0.22 | 0.9 (band 0.5 to 2.5%) | 81.9 |
| Phosphorus | 0.18 | 0.7 (band 0.4 to 1.6%) | 86.7 |
| Calcium:phosphorus ratio | 1.2 | 1.2 (band 1 to 2%) | 83.3 |
Scored over 6 declared nutrients (combined weight 80); undeclared nutrients do not affect the score.
No nutritional additives section declared on the label.
Medium confidence: the full five-part analysis is on file; where moisture was not declared it was estimated from the food type.
This measures agreement with published reference ranges, not suitability for an individual dog. For medical conditions, follow veterinary guidance.
Transparency: what the label discloses
How much the manufacturer discloses, measured against the FEDIAF Code of Good Labelling Practice and Regulation 767/2009. Mandatory items dominate the weighting.
| Item | Points |
|---|---|
| Ingredient list on the label (mandatory) | 10/10 |
| Printed percentages on the label (100% of the recipe mass) (voluntary) | 20/20 |
| Analytical constituents declared (mandatory) | 15/15 |
| Additives declared (mandatory) - not on file | 0/10 |
| Energy value declared (voluntary) - not on file | 0/5 |
| Complete/complementary designation (mandatory) | 5/5 |
| Feeding guidance given (mandatory) | 10/10 |
| Manufacturer identity and address (mandatory) | 10/10 |
| Country of manufacture stated (voluntary) | 10/10 |
| Batch and date labelling (mandatory) - not on file | 0/5 |
Capped at 60: mandatory items missing (Additives declared, Batch and date labelling).
Safety: recall history
Recall and safety-notice history, time-decayed. This dimension is shown alongside the score and never feeds the headline number.
No recalls recorded in our database.
Evidence: what the brand claims, and what supports it
The claims made on the pack and product page, checked against the declared label. We record claims as stated; "consistent" means our stored label data supports the claim, "contradicted" means it conflicts with it. Functional claims are recorded but never scored.
0/100 · limited — 1 checkable claim: 0 consistent, 1 contradicted.
Contradicted by the label
- "Monoprotein-Nassfutter" — the declared label says otherwise on single protein.
8 further claims on file that we cannot check against the label.
Limited: at least one claim contradicts the declared label, or a recent upheld ASA ruling applies.
| Claim | Type | Check | Substantiation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Monoprotein-Nassfutter (on page) | Content | contradicted | Manufacturer assertion |
| 100% Lebensmittelqualität (on page) | Content | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| komplett ohne künstliche Zusätze (on page) | provenance | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| hypoallergenes, leicht verdauliches Nassfutter (on page) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| verzichtet auf Schlachtabfälle, minderwertige Nebenerzeugnisse, Bindemittel sowie Tier- und Knochenmehl (on page) | Free-from | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Premium-Alleinfuttermittel (on page) | Content | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| ohne Zucker, künstliche Zusatzstoffe und billige Füllstoffe (on page) | Free-from | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Calcium-Phosphor-Verhältnis liegt bei 1,22:1 (on page) | Content | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| garantiert frei von Aromen, Farbstoffen, künstlichen Konservierungsstoffen, Antioxidantien, Zucker sowie synthetischen Zusätzen (on page) | Free-from | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
The full scoring method is published. See the methodology for exactly how the headline score and each dimension are calculated.
Alternatives to Rind
Similar on ingredients, protein, format or nutrition, using the same stored data.
Community0 comments
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Be the first to share how this went down with your dog.