Is HEY HOLY Ravishing Retrievers Nassfutter mit Lamm a good dog food?
We score it 59/100 (Average). This reflects the ingredient quality, composition and label transparency of the recipe as declared on the label.
Why this score?
The overall score is 59 out of 100. Undeclared ingredient shares, meaning ingredients without printed percentages, contributed -4.2. Being labelled nutritionally complete contributed +2.3. The overall quality of the ingredient list contributed +2. Unclassified ingredients, meaning ingredients we could not classify, contributed -1.9.
40% of this recipe has no printed percentage. Estimated shares are model estimates, not label facts.
- Recipe59
- Nutritionalhigh99
- Transparency60
- Safety100
- EvidenceNot recorded
The Recipe score measures how attractive and transparent the declared ingredient list is. It is not, by itself, proof that the food is nutritionally appropriate for long-term feeding. The Nutritional and Evidence scores measure what we can verify towards that stronger claim.
Estimated composition
Typical analysis (as fed)
- Protein
- 9.90%
- Fat
- 5.90%
- Fibre
- 0.60%
- Ash
- 2.50%
- Moisture
- 77%
- Omega-3 fatty acids
- 0.10%
- Omega-6 fatty acids
- 0.60%
- Calcium
- 0.40%
- Phosphorus
- 0.30%
Energy: 105 kcal/100g
Additives & feeding info
Nutritional additives
Vitamin D3 200 IE/kg; Zink (als Zinksulfat, Monohydrat) 25 mg/kg; Mangan (als Mangan(II)-sulfat, Monohydrat) 1.4 mg/kg; L-Carnitin 200 mg/kg
Feeding guide
Energy content 4.4 MJ ME/kg; 15-20kg dog: 803-996 g/day; 25-30kg: 1178-1350 g/day; 35-40kg: 1516-1675 g/day; 45-50kg: 1830-1981 g/day
Reviews
Trustpilot: 4.7/5 · 1,401 reviews
Who is this food for?
We could not match this product's ingredients to our glossary, so suitability flags are unknown rather than clear.
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. Use the homepage filter to find foods that fit your dog.
Ingredients (16)
| # | As declared | Matched | Category | Tier | Declared % | Est. % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Lamb | Lamb | meat | medium | - | 8.2 |
| 2 | lamb livers | Liver | meat | good | - | 7.9 |
| 3 | lamb lungs | Lung | meat | medium | - | 7.7 |
| 4 | lamb meat | Lamb | meat | medium | - | 7.4 |
| 5 | lamb hearts | Heart | meat | good | - | 7.1 |
| 6 | lamb tripe | Lamb Tripe | meat | medium | - | 6.9 |
| 7 | Broth | Cooking broth | other | medium | - | 6.6 |
| 8 | Sweet Potatoes | Sweet Potatoes | carb | good | - | 6.4 |
| 9 | Peas | Peas | veg | medium | - | 6.1 |
| 10 | Chickpeas | Chickpeas | veg | medium | - | 5.9 |
| 11 | Minerals | Vitamins and minerals | supplement | medium | - | 5.6 |
| 12 | Sunflower Oil | Sunflower oil | oil | good | - | 5.4 |
| 13 | Brewer's Yeast | Brewer's Yeast | supplement | good | - | 5.1 |
| 14 | MOS | Mannanoligosaccharides | supplement | good | - | 4.8 |
| 15 | Salmon Oil | Salmon Oil | oil | good | - | 4.6 |
| 16 | Green Lipped Mussels | Green-Lipped Mussel | supplement | good | - | 4.3 |
Brand
- Website
- https://heyholy.com/
Trust and provenance
- Recall history
- No recalls recorded in our database
- Label data last checked
- 2026-09-27
- Scored with
- Model v3 (methodology)
- Product page
- heyholy.com
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.
Spotted a mistake in this listing? Report it here and we'll take a look.
Recipe: how the 1-100 score is calculated
Scored with model v3 on 2026-09-27. 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 | 0.2 | 9.191 | +2.02 |
| Oil share of dry matter | 8.4% | -0.092 | -0.77 |
| Supplement share of dry matter | 12.2% | -0.012 | -0.15 |
| Other share of dry matter | 0.3% | -0.375 | -0.11 |
| Unrecognised share of dry matter | 72.9% | -0.027 | -1.93 |
| Undeclared quantities | 40.0% | -0.106 | -4.22 |
| Complete diet | yes | 2.294 | +2.29 |
| Low meat (under 10% of dry matter) | yes | -3.158 | -3.16 |
| Processing multiplier | 1.00 | 33.786 | +33.79 |
| Processing: Wet Pate | yes | -0.672 | -0.67 |
Show all 40 components
| Component | Input | Coefficient | Contribution |
|---|---|---|---|
| Base score | - | 30.909 | +30.91 |
| Average ingredient quality | 0.2 | 9.191 | +2.02 |
| Meat share of dry matter | 0.0% | 0.096 | +0.00 |
| Carb share of dry matter | 0.0% | -0.115 | +0.00 |
| Oil share of dry matter | 8.4% | -0.092 | -0.77 |
| Vegetable share of dry matter | 0.8% | -0.005 | -0.00 |
| Additive share of dry matter | 0.0% | 0.163 | +0.00 |
| Supplement share of dry matter | 12.2% | -0.012 | -0.15 |
| Other share of dry matter | 0.3% | -0.375 | -0.11 |
| Unrecognised share of dry matter | 72.9% | -0.027 | -1.93 |
| 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 | 40.0% | -0.106 | -4.22 |
| Prints ingredient percentages | no | 0.000 | +0.00 |
| Complete diet | yes | 2.294 | +2.29 |
| Frozen or chilled fresh | no | 0.000 | +0.00 |
| High meat (30%+ of dry matter) | no | 0.707 | +0.00 |
| Low meat (under 10% of dry matter) | yes | -3.158 | -3.16 |
| 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 | 0.00 | 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 | 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 | yes | -0.672 | -0.67 |
| Processing: Wet Chunks | no | -0.672 | +0.00 |
- Processing-type offset
- -0.08
- Additives declared on label
- +1 transparency bonus
- Subtotal
- 58.9
- Final score
- 59/100
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 | 9.9 | 43 (band 18 to 40%) | 100 |
| Fat | 5.9 | 25.7 (band 5.5 to 20%) | 100 |
| Fibre | 0.6 | 2.6 (band 0.5 to 5%) | 98.1 |
| Calcium | 0.4 | 1.7 (band 0.5 to 2.5%) | 100 |
| Phosphorus | 0.3 | 1.3 (band 0.4 to 1.6%) | 100 |
| Calcium:phosphorus ratio | 1.3 | 1.3 (band 1 to 2%) | 90 |
| Omega fatty acids (omega-6 and omega-3) | - | - | 100 |
| Energy (kcal/100g) | 105 | 456.5 | 100 |
Omega fatty acids (omega-6 and omega-3): scored as the mean of its declared components (omega-6 100). The FEDIAF minimum for omega-6 is linoleic acid specifically.
Scored over 8 declared nutrients (combined weight 100); undeclared nutrients do not affect the score.
High confidence: full analysis plus minerals or omegas and declared energy.
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 (60% of the recipe mass) (voluntary) | 12/20 |
| Analytical constituents declared (mandatory) | 15/15 |
| Additives declared (mandatory) | 5/10 |
| Energy value declared (voluntary) | 5/5 |
| Complete/complementary designation (mandatory) | 5/5 |
| Feeding guidance given (mandatory) | 10/10 |
| Manufacturer identity and address (mandatory) | 5/10 |
| Country of manufacture stated (voluntary) | 10/10 |
| Batch and date labelling (mandatory) - not on file | 0/5 |
Capped at 60: mandatory items missing (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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 100% Getreidefrei (on page) | Free-from | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Hochverträglich (on page) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Rassenspezififisch (on page) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Nur ein Protein (on page) | Content | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| mit frischem Lammfleisch (on page) | Content | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Hoher Fleischanteil (on page) | Content | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Für Retriever-Rassen entwickelt (on page) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| 92% aller Kunden berichten, dass ihr Hund das Futter sehr gut verträgt (on page) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| 85% bewerten die Akzeptanz des Futters als ausgezeichnet (on page) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| 65% konnten bereits in den ersten 4 Wochen eine deutliche Verbesserung der Magen-Darm-Gesundheit feststellen (on page) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
The full scoring method is published. See the methodology for exactly how the headline score and each dimension are calculated.
Other products from HEY HOLY
See all products from HEY HOLY
Community
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Be the first to share how this went down with your dog.