Vet-Concept Hundemenü Sana Hermetia
Wet Pate · completeHigh insect protein
Our verdict
Is Vet-Concept Hundemenü Sana Hermetia a good dog food?
We score it 64/100 (Average). This reflects the ingredient quality, composition and label transparency of the recipe as declared on the label.
48% of this recipe has no printed percentage. Estimated shares are model estimates, not label facts.
Who is this food for?
Suits
- Labelled by the manufacturer for adult dogs
- Grain-free: no grain ingredients listed
- Single named protein: insect
- Doesn't list chicken, beef, turkey, lamb, fish, venison, pork, duck as ingredients
Consider something else if:
- You are limiting fat: 22.5% on a dry-matter basis is in the high band
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 (5)48% of the recipe is estimated
Estimated composition
- meat 52.0%
- veg 14.8%
- other 12.9%
- supplement 11.1%
- fibre 9.2%
| # | As declared | Matched | Label reading | Declared % | Est. % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Insects (Hermetia illucens larvae) (52%) | Insects | meat · good | 52 | 52.0 |
| 2 | Vegetables (Sweet Potato) | Vegetables | veg · medium | - | 14.8 |
| 3 | Plant By-Products (Tomato) | Vegetable By-Products | other · poor | - | 12.9 |
| 4 | Minerals | Vitamins and minerals | supplement · medium | - | 11.1 |
| 5 | Chicory Root (source of inulin) (0.1%) *dried | Chicory root | veg · good | - | 9.2 |
- 1. Insects (Hermetia illucens larvae) (52%)52% declared52.0% estimated
- 2. Vegetables (Sweet Potato)14.8% estimated
- 3. Plant By-Products (Tomato)12.9% estimated
- 4. Minerals11.1% estimated
- 5. Chicory Root (source of inulin) (0.1%) *dried9.2% estimated
Nutrition and feedingProtein 8.60% · Fat 5.40%
Typical analysis (as fed)
| Nutrient | As fed |
|---|---|
| Protein | 8.60% |
| Fat | 5.40% |
| Fibre | 0.80% |
| Ash | 2% |
| Moisture | 76% |
| Omega-3 fatty acids | 0.10% |
| Calcium | 0.26% |
| Phosphorus | 0.18% |
| Sodium | 0.10% |
Additives & feeding info
Feeding and storage
Feeding guide
3 bis 8 Wochen; bei Verschwinden der Intoleranzanzeichen bis zu einem Jahr; vor Verwendung und Verlängerung Tierarzt konsultieren; Wasser zur freien Aufnahme anbieten.
Additives declared on the label
Nutritional additives
Vitamin A 3.000 IE; Vitamin D3 240 IE; Vitamin E (all rac-alpha-Tocopherylacetat) 36 mg; Taurin 580 mg; Zink (Zinksulfat, Monohydrat) 25,2 mg; Kupfer (Kupfer(II-sulfat-Pentahydrat) 2 mg; Mangan (Mangan(II)-sulfat, Monohydrat) 2,0 mg; Jod (Kalziumjodat, wasserfrei) 0,9 mg; DL-Methionin 500 mg
Trust and sourceNo recalls recorded in our database · checked 2026-09-19
Brand and contact: Vet-Concept
- Contact page
- www.vet-concept.com
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.vet-concept.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.
Brand and retailer reviews
External platform ratings are not scores for this individual recipe.
Trustpilot: 0.0/5 · 0 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?
We scored this recipe at 64 out of 100. The meat content contributed +3.3 points, while the overall quality of the ingredient list contributed +4.6 points. On the downside, the remaining ingredients deducted -5.8 points and ingredients without printed percentages deducted -5.1 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 | 0.5 | 9.191 | +4.61 |
| Meat share of dry matter | 34.9% | 0.096 | +3.35 |
| Vegetable share of dry matter | 5.3% | -0.005 | -0.03 |
| Supplement share of dry matter | 24.4% | -0.012 | -0.30 |
| Other share of dry matter | 15.5% | -0.375 | -5.80 |
| Recipe graded poor | 12.9% | -0.065 | -0.84 |
| Number of poor ingredients | 1 | -0.876 | -0.88 |
| Largest single poor ingredient | 12.9% | 0.060 | +0.78 |
| Undeclared quantities | 48.0% | -0.106 | -5.07 |
| Complete diet | yes | 2.294 | +2.29 |
| High meat (30%+ of dry matter) | yes | 0.707 | +0.71 |
| 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 | 0.5 | 9.191 | +4.61 |
| Meat share of dry matter | 34.9% | 0.096 | +3.35 |
| Carb share of dry matter | 0.0% | -0.115 | +0.00 |
| Oil share of dry matter | 0.0% | -0.092 | +0.00 |
| Vegetable share of dry matter | 5.3% | -0.005 | -0.03 |
| Additive share of dry matter | 0.0% | 0.163 | +0.00 |
| Supplement share of dry matter | 24.4% | -0.012 | -0.30 |
| Other share of dry matter | 15.5% | -0.375 | -5.80 |
| Unrecognised share of dry matter | 0.0% | -0.027 | +0.00 |
| Recipe graded poor | 12.9% | -0.065 | -0.84 |
| Poor-quality meat in recipe | 0.0% | -0.179 | +0.00 |
| Number of poor ingredients | 1 | -0.876 | -0.88 |
| Largest single poor ingredient | 12.9% | 0.060 | +0.78 |
| Undeclared quantities | 48.0% | -0.106 | -5.07 |
| 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) | 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 | 0.00 | 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
- 63.8
- Final score
- 64/100
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 | 8.6 | 35.8 (band 18 to 40%) | 100 |
| Fat | 5.4 | 22.5 (band 5.5 to 20%) | 100 |
| Fibre | 0.8 | 3.3 (band 0.5 to 5%) | 100 |
| Calcium | 0.26 | 1.1 (band 0.5 to 2.5%) | 87.5 |
| Phosphorus | 0.18 | 0.8 (band 0.4 to 1.6%) | 87.5 |
| Sodium | 0.1 | 0.4 (band 0.1+%) | 100 |
| Calcium:phosphorus ratio | 1.4 | 1.4 (band 1 to 2%) | 96.7 |
Scored over 7 declared nutrients (combined weight 85); undeclared nutrients do not affect the score.
Declared fortification: 9 nutritional additives on the label
- Vitamin A 3.000 IE
- Vitamin D3 240 IE
- Vitamin E (all rac-alpha-Tocopherylacetat) 36 mg
- Taurin 580 mg
- Zink (Zinksulfat, Monohydrat) 25,2 mg
- Kupfer (Kupfer(II-sulfat-Pentahydrat) 2 mg
- Mangan (Mangan(II)-sulfat, Monohydrat) 2,0 mg
- Jod (Kalziumjodat, wasserfrei) 0,9 mg
- DL-Methionin 500 mg
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 (52% of the recipe mass) (voluntary) | 10.4/20 |
| Analytical constituents declared (mandatory) | 15/15 |
| Additives declared (mandatory) | 5/10 |
| 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) | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bei Futtermittelunverträglichkeit und futtermittelbedingten Veränderungen von Haut oder Verdauung (on page) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Zur Ausschlussfütterung geeignet (on page) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Mit wertvollen Faserstoffen zur Unterstützung der Darmgesundheit (on page) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Keine Geruchs-, Farb- oder Geschmacksstoffe (on page) | Free-from | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Frei von gentechnisch manipulierten Zutaten und chem. Konservierungsstoffen (on page) | Free-from | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Mit ausgewählten und zahlenmäßig begrenzten Proteinquellen (on page) | Content | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Keine Tierversuche (on page) | Free-from | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Nur eine Proteinquelle und ausgewählte Kohlenhydratquellen (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 Hundemenü Sana Hermetia
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.