Vet-Concept Lamb Pack Mini
Dry Extruded · completeClear label
Our verdict
Is Vet-Concept Lamb Pack Mini a good dog food?
We score it 41/100 (Poor). The main reasons are set out in "Why you might not" below, and every step of the calculation is shown under "How we calculated this score".
68% 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
- Labelling or feeding guide is aimed at small dogs
- Doesn't list chicken, beef, turkey, fish, venison, pork, duck as ingredients
Consider something else if:
- Your dog avoids lamb: it is listed as an ingredient
- Your dog avoids grain: the label lists cereals
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 (7)68% of the recipe is estimated
Estimated composition
- unknown 32.0%
- fibre 25.5%
- carb 17.0%
- oil 15.3%
- supplement 10.3%
| # | As declared | Matched | Label reading | Declared % | Est. % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Cereals (Rice) | Cereals | carb · poor | - | 14.3 |
| 2 | Meat and derivatives (Lamb meal) (32%) | Fresh Meat | meat · medium | 32 | 32.0 |
| 3 | Oils and fats | Oils and Fats | oil · poor | - | 13.1 |
| 4 | Dried beet pulp | Beet Pulp | fibre · medium | - | 11.9 |
| 5 | Cellulose | Cellulose | fibre · medium | - | 10.7 |
| 6 | Minerals | Vitamins and minerals | supplement · medium | - | 9.5 |
| 7 | Extracted yeast* | Yeast | supplement · good | - | 8.4 |
- 1. Cereals (Rice)14.3% estimated
- 2. Meat and derivatives (Lamb meal) (32%)32% declared32.0% estimated
- 3. Oils and fats13.1% estimated
- 4. Dried beet pulp11.9% estimated
- 5. Cellulose10.7% estimated
- 6. Minerals9.5% estimated
- 7. Extracted yeast*8.4% estimated
Nutrition and feedingProtein 22.60% · Fat 12.10%
Typical analysis (as fed)
| Nutrient | As fed |
|---|---|
| Protein | 22.60% |
| Fat | 12.10% |
| Fibre | 2% |
| Ash | 6.80% |
| Moisture | 9% |
| Omega-3 fatty acids | 0.25% |
| Omega-6 fatty acids | 2% |
| Calcium | 1.35% |
| Phosphorus | 0.90% |
| Sodium | 0.25% |
Energy: 369 kcal/100g
Additives & feeding info
Additives declared on the label
Nutritional additives
Vitamin A 12.000 IE; Vitamin D3 1.200 IE; Vitamin E (all rac-alpha-Tocopherylacetat) 120 mg; Taurin 1.0
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?
The overall score is 41 out of 100. Ingredients without printed percentages weighed against the product, and the processing format also cost it points. Being labelled nutritionally complete helped recover some of that, adding +2.3, while the carbohydrate content dragged the score down by -2.2. The first and last factors contributed -7.2 and -6.7 respectively to the final result.
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 | -0.2 | 9.191 | -1.62 |
| Carb share of dry matter | 19.0% | -0.115 | -2.19 |
| Oil share of dry matter | 19.3% | -0.092 | -1.77 |
| Supplement share of dry matter | 12.1% | -0.012 | -0.15 |
| Unrecognised share of dry matter | 20.4% | -0.027 | -0.54 |
| Recipe graded poor | 32.3% | -0.065 | -2.10 |
| Number of poor ingredients | 2 | -0.876 | -1.75 |
| Largest single poor ingredient | 17.0% | 0.060 | +1.02 |
| Undeclared quantities | 67.9% | -0.106 | -7.17 |
| Complete diet | yes | 2.294 | +2.29 |
| Low meat (under 10% of dry matter) | yes | -3.158 | -3.16 |
| Processing multiplier | 0.98 | 33.786 | +33.11 |
| Processing: Dry Extruded | yes | -6.713 | -6.71 |
Show all 40 components
| Component | Input | Coefficient | Contribution |
|---|---|---|---|
| Base score | - | 30.909 | +30.91 |
| Average ingredient quality | -0.2 | 9.191 | -1.62 |
| Meat share of dry matter | 0.0% | 0.096 | +0.00 |
| Carb share of dry matter | 19.0% | -0.115 | -2.19 |
| Oil share of dry matter | 19.3% | -0.092 | -1.77 |
| Vegetable share of dry matter | 0.0% | -0.005 | +0.00 |
| Additive share of dry matter | 0.0% | 0.163 | +0.00 |
| Supplement share of dry matter | 12.1% | -0.012 | -0.15 |
| Other share of dry matter | 0.0% | -0.375 | +0.00 |
| Unrecognised share of dry matter | 20.4% | -0.027 | -0.54 |
| Recipe graded poor | 32.3% | -0.065 | -2.10 |
| Poor-quality meat in recipe | 0.0% | -0.179 | +0.00 |
| Number of poor ingredients | 2 | -0.876 | -1.75 |
| Largest single poor ingredient | 17.0% | 0.060 | +1.02 |
| Undeclared quantities | 67.9% | -0.106 | -7.17 |
| 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 | 0.98 | 33.786 | +33.11 |
| 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 | yes | -6.713 | -6.71 |
| 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
- +0.02
- Additives declared on label
- +1 transparency bonus
- Subtotal
- 41.2
- Final score
- 41/100
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 | 22.6 | 24.8 (band 18.24725274725275 to 40%) | 88.2 |
| Fat | 12.1 | 13.3 (band 5.575549450549452 to 20%) | 100 |
| Fibre | 2 | 2.2 (band 0.5 to 5%) | 92.6 |
| Calcium | 1.35 | 1.5 (band 0.506868131868132 to 2.5%) | 99.4 |
| Phosphorus | 0.9 | 1 (band 0.4054945054945056 to 1.6%) | 99.3 |
| Sodium | 0.25 | 0.3 (band 0.1013736263736264+%) | 100 |
| Calcium:phosphorus ratio | 1.5 | 1.5 (band 1 to 2%) | 100 |
| Omega fatty acids (omega-6 and omega-3) | - | - | 100 |
| Energy (kcal/100g) | 369 | 405.5 | 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 9 declared nutrients (combined weight 105); undeclared nutrients do not affect the score.
Declared fortification: 4 nutritional additives on the label
- Vitamin A 12.000 IE
- Vitamin D3 1.200 IE
- Vitamin E (all rac-alpha-Tocopherylacetat) 120 mg
- Taurin 1.0
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 (32.1% of the recipe mass) (voluntary) | 6.4/20 |
| 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) - not on file | 0/10 |
| 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 (Feeding guidance given, 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.
50/100 · limited — 2 checkable claims: 1 consistent, 1 contradicted.
Contradicted by the label
- "enthält leicht verdauliches Lammfleisch als einzige tierische Proteinquelle" — the declared label says otherwise on single protein.
Consistent with the label
- "Alleinfuttermittel für adulte Hunde" — supported by the declared complete and balanced data.
4 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hochverdauliche Premiumnahrung für futtersensible Hunde kleiner Rassen (on pack) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Für ernährungssensible, kleine Hunde, auch zur Ausschlussfütterung geeignet (on pack) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Leicht verdauliches Protein, abgestimmte Mineralstoffe und ein moderater Natriumgehalt (on pack) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Alleinfuttermittel für adulte Hunde (on pack) | Content | consistent | Manufacturer assertion |
| Mit essenzieller Linolsäure und Faserstoffen für eine ausgewogene Nährstoffversorgung (on pack) | Nutrient | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| enthält leicht verdauliches Lammfleisch als einzige tierische Proteinquelle (on pack) | Content | contradicted | Manufacturer assertion |
The full scoring method is published. See the methodology for exactly how the headline score and each dimension are calculated.
Alternatives to Lamb Pack Mini
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.