Bubeck Pferd mit Kartoffel Nassfutter

Wet Pate · completeHigh meatClear label

Pferd mit Kartoffel Nassfutter
Good
our rating

Our verdict

Is Bubeck Pferd mit Kartoffel Nassfutter a good dog food?

We score it 73/100 (Good). This reflects the ingredient quality, composition and label transparency of the recipe as declared on the label.

How we score

25% of this recipe has no printed percentage. Estimated shares are model estimates, not label facts.

Why you might choose it

  • Meat makes up an estimated 51% of the dry matter (65% as fed).
  • Prints ingredient percentages on the label.
  • Single named animal protein: horse.

Why you might not

  • High in fat: 28% fat on a dry-matter basis.

Who is this food for?

Suits

  • Labelled by the manufacturer for adult dogs
  • Grain-free: no grain ingredients listed
  • Single named protein: horse
  • Doesn't list chicken, beef, turkey, lamb, fish, venison, pork, duck as ingredients

Consider something else if:

  • You are limiting fat: 28.0% 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.

Nutrition and feedingProtein 9.50% · Fat 7%

Typical analysis (as fed)

NutrientAs fed
Protein9.50%
Fat7%
Fibre0.80%
Ash2.50%
Moisture75%
Calcium0.45%
Phosphorus0.33%

Additives & feeding info

Feeding and storage

Storage

Die geöffnete Packung im Kühlschrank kühlen und zeitnah verzehren. Nur zimmerwarm füttern.

Feeding guide

Pro 5 kg Körpergewicht ca. 150 bis 250g pro Tag für einen normal aktiven erwachsenen Hund. Genaue Fütterungsempfehlung auf der Packung.

Additives declared on the label

Nutritional additives

Vitamin D3 150 I.E./kg; Vitamin E 30 mg/kg; Kupfer (aus Kupfer(II)-Sulfat-Pentahydrat) 2 mg/kg; Selen (aus Natriumselenit) 0,1 mg/kg; Zink (aus Aminosäuren-Zinkchelat, Hydrat) 39 mg/kg; Jod (aus Calciumjodat, wasserfrei) 1 mg/kg

Ingredients (14)25% of the recipe is estimated

Estimated composition

  • meat 65.3%
  • carb 9.8%
  • unknown 6.5%
  • veg 6.0%
  • fibre 4.5%
  • supplement 4.5%
  • additive 3.1%
  • oil 0.3%
#As declaredMatchedLabel readingDeclared %Est. %
1Horse Meat (60%)Horse Meatmeat · good6060.0
2Horse BrothHorse Brothmeat · good-5.3
3Potato (5%)Potatoescarb · medium55.0
4Carrot (4%)Carrotsveg · good44.0
5Pea Protein Isolate (3%)Pea proteincarb · medium33.0
6Parsnip (2%)Parsnipsveg · good22.0
7TapiocaTapiocacarb · medium-4.8
8Potato FibrePotato Fibrefibre · medium-4.4
9Brewer's Yeast (0.5%)Brewer's Yeastsupplement · good0.50.5
10Hemp Oil (0.3%)Hemp Oiloil · good0.30.3
11Potassium ChloridePotassium Chloridesupplement · medium-4.0
12Carrot JuiceCarrot Juiceveg · good-3.5
13Psyllium Husks (0.1%)Psylliumfibre · good0.10.1
14Sodium ChlorideSaltadditive · poor-3.1
  1. 1. Horse Meat (60%)60% declared60.0% estimated
    Horse Meat · meat · good
  2. 2. Horse Broth5.3% estimated
    Horse Broth · meat · good
  3. 3. Potato (5%)5% declared5.0% estimated
    Potatoes · carb · medium
  4. 4. Carrot (4%)4% declared4.0% estimated
    Carrots · veg · good
  5. 5. Pea Protein Isolate (3%)3% declared3.0% estimated
    Pea protein · carb · medium
  6. 6. Parsnip (2%)2% declared2.0% estimated
    Parsnips · veg · good
  7. 7. Tapioca4.8% estimated
    Tapioca · carb · medium
  8. 8. Potato Fibre4.4% estimated
    Potato Fibre · fibre · medium
  9. 9. Brewer's Yeast (0.5%)0.5% declared0.5% estimated
    Brewer's Yeast · supplement · good
  10. 10. Hemp Oil (0.3%)0.3% declared0.3% estimated
    Hemp Oil · oil · good
  11. 11. Potassium Chloride4.0% estimated
    Potassium Chloride · supplement · medium
  12. 12. Carrot Juice3.5% estimated
    Carrot Juice · veg · good
  13. 13. Psyllium Husks (0.1%)0.1% declared0.1% estimated
    Psyllium · fibre · good
  14. 14. Sodium Chloride3.1% estimated
    Salt · additive · poor

Trust and sourceNo recalls recorded in our database · checked 2026-09-19

Brand and contact: Bubeck

Trust and provenance

Recall history
No recalls recorded in our database
Label data last checked
2026-09-19
Scored with
Model v3 (methodology)

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.

External platform ratings are not scores for this individual recipe.

Trustpilot: 3.4/5 · 10 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 73 out of 100. The overall quality of the ingredient list contributed +4.7 points, and the meat content contributed +4.5 points. Ingredients without printed percentages reduced the score by -2.7, while being labelled nutritionally complete added +2.3 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.

ComponentInputCoefficientContribution
Base score-30.909+30.91
Average ingredient quality0.59.191+4.74
Meat share of dry matter46.5%0.096+4.46
Carb share of dry matter6.8%-0.115-0.78
Oil share of dry matter0.8%-0.092-0.08
Vegetable share of dry matter2.5%-0.005-0.01
Additive share of dry matter7.7%0.163+1.25
Supplement share of dry matter11.4%-0.012-0.14
Unrecognised share of dry matter9.0%-0.027-0.24
Recipe graded poor3.1%-0.065-0.20
Number of poor ingredients1-0.876-0.88
Largest single poor ingredient3.1%0.060+0.18
Undeclared quantities25.1%-0.106-2.65
Complete dietyes2.294+2.29
High meat (30%+ of dry matter)yes0.707+0.71
Additive penalty-3.760.222-0.83
Processing multiplier1.0033.786+33.79
Processing: Wet Pateyes-0.672-0.67
Show all 40 components
ComponentInputCoefficientContribution
Base score-30.909+30.91
Average ingredient quality0.59.191+4.74
Meat share of dry matter46.5%0.096+4.46
Carb share of dry matter6.8%-0.115-0.78
Oil share of dry matter0.8%-0.092-0.08
Vegetable share of dry matter2.5%-0.005-0.01
Additive share of dry matter7.7%0.163+1.25
Supplement share of dry matter11.4%-0.012-0.14
Other share of dry matter0.0%-0.375+0.00
Unrecognised share of dry matter9.0%-0.027-0.24
Recipe graded poor3.1%-0.065-0.20
Poor-quality meat in recipe0.0%-0.179+0.00
Number of poor ingredients1-0.876-0.88
Largest single poor ingredient3.1%0.060+0.18
Undeclared quantities25.1%-0.106-2.65
Prints ingredient percentagesno0.000+0.00
Complete dietyes2.294+2.29
Frozen or chilled freshno0.000+0.00
High meat (30%+ of dry matter)yes0.707+0.71
Low meat (under 10% of dry matter)no-3.158+0.00
High carb and low meatno-1.180+0.00
Meat share × printed percentages0.00.000+0.00
Meat share × fresh0.00.000+0.00
Fresh × high meat0.011.084+0.00
Additive penalty-3.760.222-0.83
Processing multiplier1.0033.786+33.79
Processing: Rawno-0.054+0.00
Processing: Fresh Chilledno-2.354+0.00
Processing: Fresh Frozenno-2.354+0.00
Processing: Fresh Refrigeratedno0.000+0.00
Processing: Fresh Shelfno-0.672+0.00
Processing: Dry Freeze Driedno6.629+0.00
Processing: Dry Air Driedno6.331+0.00
Processing: Dry Cold Pressedno-6.713+0.00
Processing: Dry Bakedno-6.713+0.00
Processing: Dry Extrudedno-6.713+0.00
Processing: Dry Semi Moistno-6.174+0.00
Processing: Dry Mueslino-10.146+0.00
Processing: Wet Pateyes-0.672-0.67
Processing: Wet Chunksno-0.672+0.00
Processing-type offset
-0.08
Additives declared on label
+1 transparency bonus
Subtotal
72.8
Final score
73/100

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.

NutrientAs fed (label)Dry matter (scored)Score
Protein9.538 (band 18 to 40%)100
Fat728 (band 5.5 to 20%)100
Fibre0.83.2 (band 0.5 to 5%)100
Calcium0.451.8 (band 0.5 to 2.5%)100
Phosphorus0.331.3 (band 0.4 to 1.6%)100
Calcium:phosphorus ratio1.41.4 (band 1 to 2%)91.8

Scored over 6 declared nutrients (combined weight 80); undeclared nutrients do not affect the score.

Declared fortification: 6 nutritional additives on the label
  • Vitamin D3 150 I.E./kg
  • Vitamin E 30 mg/kg
  • Kupfer (aus Kupfer(II)-Sulfat-Pentahydrat) 2 mg/kg
  • Selen (aus Natriumselenit) 0,1 mg/kg
  • Zink (aus Aminosäuren-Zinkchelat, Hydrat) 39 mg/kg
  • Jod (aus Calciumjodat, wasserfrei) 1 mg/kg

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.

ItemPoints
✓ Ingredient list on the label (mandatory)10/10
✓ Printed percentages on the label (74.9% of the recipe mass) (voluntary)15/20
✓ Analytical constituents declared (mandatory)15/15
✓ Additives declared (mandatory)5/10
✗ Energy value declared (voluntary) - not on file0/5
✓ 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 file0/5

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.

See all current recalls we track.

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.

100/100 · moderate — 2 checkable claims: 2 consistent, 0 contradicted.

Consistent with the label

  • "getreidefreies Alleinfuttermittel" — supported by the declared grain-free data.
  • "Single-Protein-Menü" — supported by the declared single protein data.

4 further claims on file that we cannot check against the label.

Moderate: every checkable claim is consistent with the declared label.

ClaimTypeCheckSubstantiation
besonders bekömmlich für sensible Hunde, kleine Rassen oder ältere Vierbeiner (on page)Functionalnot checkableManufacturer assertion
90% weniger Müll als bei herkömmlichen Dosen (on page)Functionalnot checkableManufacturer assertion
getreidefreies Alleinfuttermittel (on page)Free-fromconsistentManufacturer assertion
Vollständig recycelbar (on page)Contentnot checkableManufacturer assertion
Single-Protein-Menü (on page)ContentconsistentManufacturer assertion
schonend dampfgegart im nachhaltigen Frische-Pouch (on page)Contentnot checkableManufacturer assertion

The full scoring method is published. See the methodology for exactly how the headline score and each dimension are calculated.

Alternatives to Pferd mit Kartoffel Nassfutter

Similar on ingredients, protein, format or nutrition, using the same stored data.

See all alternatives

See all products from Bubeck

Community0 comments

Owners' verdict
0 votes

Comments (0)

No comments yet. Be the first to share how this went down with your dog.

Comments are reviewed before they appear.