Haustierkost All-in-One Nuggets Horse
Fresh Frozen · completeHigh meatClear label
Our verdict
Is Haustierkost All-in-One Nuggets Horse a good dog food?
We score it 86/100 (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
- Grain-free: no grain ingredients listed
- Doesn't list chicken, beef, turkey, lamb, venison, pork, duck as ingredients
Consider something else if:
- Your dog avoids fish: the label lists fish oil
- You want a single-protein recipe: this one lists more than one animal protein
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 (12)0% of the recipe is estimated
Estimated composition
- meat 69.2%
- carb 16.8%
- veg 4.7%
- fibre 4.1%
- supplement 2.3%
- oil 1.8%
- unknown 1.1%
| # | As declared | Matched | Label reading | Declared % | Est. % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 64.15% muscle meat | Muscle Meat | meat · good | 64.15 | 64.2 |
| 2 | 5% liver | Horse Liver | meat · good | 5 | 5.0 |
| 3 | 16.83% potato | Potatoes | carb · medium | 16.83 | 16.8 |
| 4 | 2.27% chicory pulp | Chicory Pulp | fibre · medium | 2.27 | 2.3 |
| 5 | 2.32% minerals | Vitamins and minerals | supplement · medium | 2.32 | 2.3 |
| 6 | 1.82% beet pulp | Beet Pulp | fibre · medium | 1.82 | 1.8 |
| 7 | 1.82% carrot | Carrots | veg · good | 1.82 | 1.8 |
| 8 | 1.8% zucchini | Courgette | veg · good | 1.8 | 1.8 |
| 9 | 1.09% broccoli | Broccoli | veg · good | 1.09 | 1.1 |
| 10 | 1.09% endive | unmatched | - | 1.09 | 1.1 |
| 11 | 1.18% fish oil | Fish Oil | oil · good | 1.18 | 1.2 |
| 12 | 0.59% rapeseed oil | Rapeseed oil | oil · good | 0.59 | 0.6 |
- 1. 64.15% muscle meat64.15% declared64.2% estimated
- 2. 5% liver5% declared5.0% estimated
- 3. 16.83% potato16.83% declared16.8% estimated
- 4. 2.27% chicory pulp2.27% declared2.3% estimated
- 5. 2.32% minerals2.32% declared2.3% estimated
- 6. 1.82% beet pulp1.82% declared1.8% estimated
- 7. 1.82% carrot1.82% declared1.8% estimated
- 8. 1.8% zucchini1.8% declared1.8% estimated
- 9. 1.09% broccoli1.09% declared1.1% estimated
- 10. 1.09% endive1.09% declared1.1% estimated
- 11. 1.18% fish oil1.18% declared1.2% estimated
- 12. 0.59% rapeseed oil0.59% declared0.6% estimated
Nutrition and feedingProtein 13.20% · Fat 9.10%
Declared analysis (as fed)
| Nutrient | As fed |
|---|---|
| Protein | 13.20% |
| Fat | 9.10% |
| Fibre | 1.10% |
| Ash | 2.60% |
| Moisture | 69.40% |
| Calcium | 0.41% |
| Phosphorus | 0.37% |
Additives & feeding info
Feeding and storage
Storage
Keep frozen. Defrost the required number of nuggets in the bowl a few hours before feeding; the rest stays frozen. Resealable packaging.
Feeding guide
Feeding recommendation table for adult dogs by body weight and condition (underweight/normal/overweight) and very high activity, ranging from 110 g (2 kg normal weight) up to 2210 g (75 kg very high activity). Daily amount should be split into 2-4 portions. Fresh drinking water should always be available.
No additives recorded yet.
Trust and sourceNo recalls recorded in our database · checked 2026-09-26
Brand and contact: Haustierkost
- Website
- https://haustierkost.de/en
- Phone
- 0211-86942266
- Address
- Werftstr. 26, 40549 Düsseldorf
- Contact page
- haustierkost.de
Trust and provenance
- Recall history
- No recalls recorded in our database
- Label data last checked
- 2026-09-26
- Scored with
- Model v3 (methodology)
- Product page
- haustierkost.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: 4.5/5 · 12,855 reviews
9 reviews on this product · 4.4/5
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?
The overall score came in at 86 out of 100. The overall quality of the ingredient list contributed +6.5 points, while the meat content contributed +5.7 points. On the other side, the processing format deducted -2.4 points, and the carbohydrate content deducted -1.5 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 | +6.52 |
| Meat share of dry matter | 59.8% | 0.096 | +5.74 |
| Carb share of dry matter | 13.0% | -0.115 | -1.49 |
| Oil share of dry matter | 5.4% | -0.092 | -0.50 |
| Vegetable share of dry matter | 2.2% | -0.005 | -0.01 |
| Supplement share of dry matter | 6.6% | -0.012 | -0.08 |
| Unrecognised share of dry matter | 1.7% | -0.027 | -0.04 |
| High meat (30%+ of dry matter) | yes | 0.707 | +0.71 |
| Fresh × high meat | 1.0 | 11.084 | +11.08 |
| Processing multiplier | 1.10 | 33.786 | +37.16 |
| Processing: Fresh Frozen | yes | -2.354 | -2.35 |
Show all 40 components
| Component | Input | Coefficient | Contribution |
|---|---|---|---|
| Base score | - | 30.909 | +30.91 |
| Average ingredient quality | 0.7 | 9.191 | +6.52 |
| Meat share of dry matter | 59.8% | 0.096 | +5.74 |
| Carb share of dry matter | 13.0% | -0.115 | -1.49 |
| Oil share of dry matter | 5.4% | -0.092 | -0.50 |
| Vegetable share of dry matter | 2.2% | -0.005 | -0.01 |
| Additive share of dry matter | 0.0% | 0.163 | +0.00 |
| Supplement share of dry matter | 6.6% | -0.012 | -0.08 |
| Other share of dry matter | 0.0% | -0.375 | +0.00 |
| Unrecognised share of dry matter | 1.7% | -0.027 | -0.04 |
| 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 | 1.0 | 11.084 | +11.08 |
| Additive penalty | 0.00 | 0.222 | +0.00 |
| Processing multiplier | 1.10 | 33.786 | +37.16 |
| Processing: Raw | no | -0.054 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Fresh Chilled | no | -2.354 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Fresh Frozen | yes | -2.354 | -2.35 |
| Processing: Fresh Refrigerated | no | 0.000 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Fresh Shelf | no | -0.672 | +0.00 |
| 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
- -1.74
- Subtotal
- 85.9
- Final score
- 86/100
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 | 13.2 | 43.1 (band 18 to 40%) | 100 |
| Fat | 9.1 | 29.7 (band 5.5 to 20%) | 100 |
| Fibre | 1.1 | 3.6 (band 0.5 to 5%) | 100 |
| Calcium | 0.41 | 1.3 (band 0.5 to 2.5%) | 95.2 |
| Phosphorus | 0.37 | 1.2 (band 0.4 to 1.6%) | 100 |
| Calcium:phosphorus ratio | 1.1 | 1.1 (band 1 to 2%) | 76.5 |
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.
Claims on file; none we can check against the label
| Claim | Type | Check | Substantiation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Monoprotein (on page) | Content | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Grain-free (on page) | Content | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Gluten free (on page) | Content | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| No added sugar (on page) | Content | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| High-quality ingredients (on page) | Content | 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 All-in-One Nuggets Horse
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.