Our verdict
Is Bubeck Pures Wohl mit Lamm a good dog food?
We score it 48/100 (Average). This reflects the ingredient quality, composition and label transparency of the recipe as declared on the label.
Only part of the analytical constituents are declared, so the nutritional picture is incomplete.
100% 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: lamb
- Doesn't list chicken, beef, turkey, fish, venison, pork, duck as ingredients
Consider something else if:
- You need more protein than this: 19.0% on a dry-matter basis is in the low 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 19% · Fat 9%
Typical analysis (as fed)
| Nutrient | As fed |
|---|---|
| Protein | 19% |
| Fat | 9% |
| Fibre | 2.30% |
| Ash | 7.60% |
| Calcium | 1.80% |
| Phosphorus | 1.20% |
Energy: 336 kcal/100g
Additives & feeding info
Feeding and storage
Storage
Kühl und trocken lagern.
Feeding guide
2-5 kg: 55-90 g/day; 6-10 kg: 125-180 g/day; 11-23 kg: 210-300 g/day; 24-40 kg: 345-500 g/day. Trocken füttern oder mit Wasser anfeuchten. Frisches Trinkwasser bereitstellen.
Additives declared on the label
Nutritional additives
Vitamin A 12.000 i. E.; Vitamin D3 1.200 i. E.; Vitamin E 70 mg; Vitamin B1 10 mg; Vitamin B2 10 mg; Vitamin B6 6 mg; Vitamin B12 30 mcg; Niacin 40 mg; Vitamin C 140 mg; Pantothensäure als Calcium-D-Pantothenat 8 mg; Biotin 250 mcg; Folsäure 2 mg; Eisen als Eisen-(II)-sulfat 175 mg; Kupfer als Kupfer-(II)-Sulfat 10 mg/kg; Mangan als Mangan-(II)-oxid 20 mg/kg; Zink 125 mg/kg; Jod als Calciumjodat, wasserfrei 2 mg/kg; Selen 0,3 mg/kg
Ingredients (13)100% of the recipe is estimated
Estimated composition
- veg 40.4%
- carb 27.7%
- meat 18.5%
- oil 8.1%
- supplement 5.4%
| # | As declared | Matched | Label reading | Declared % | Est. % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Lamb (53%) | Lamb | meat · medium | 53 | 53.0 |
| 2 | Potato Flour | Potato Flour | carb · medium | - | 5.1 |
| 3 | Potato Flakes | Potatoes | carb · medium | - | 4.9 |
| 4 | Amaranth | Amaranth | carb · good | - | 4.7 |
| 5 | Whole Egg Powder | Dried Whole Egg | meat · good | - | 4.4 |
| 6 | Rapeseed Oil | Rapeseed oil | oil · good | - | 4.2 |
| 7 | Apple | Apples | veg · good | - | 4.0 |
| 8 | Parsley | Parsley | veg · good | - | 3.8 |
| 9 | Carrots | Carrots | veg · good | - | 3.6 |
| 10 | Parsnips | Parsnips | veg · good | - | 3.4 |
| 11 | Lovage | Lovage | veg · good | - | 3.2 |
| 12 | Rosemary | Rosemary | veg · good | - | 3.0 |
| 13 | Minerals. | Vitamins and minerals | supplement · medium | - | 2.8 |
- 1. Lamb (53%)53% declared53.0% estimated
- 2. Potato Flour5.1% estimated
- 3. Potato Flakes4.9% estimated
- 4. Amaranth4.7% estimated
- 5. Whole Egg Powder4.4% estimated
- 6. Rapeseed Oil4.2% estimated
- 7. Apple4.0% estimated
- 8. Parsley3.8% estimated
- 9. Carrots3.6% estimated
- 10. Parsnips3.4% estimated
- 11. Lovage3.2% estimated
- 12. Rosemary3.0% estimated
- 13. Minerals.2.8% estimated
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)
- Product page
- www.bubeck-petfood.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: 3.4/5 · 10 reviews
20 reviews on this product · 5.0/5
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?
This recipe achieves a total score of 48 out of 100 based on several distinct factors. The overall quality of the ingredient list added +7.1 points, but ingredients without printed percentages reduced the score by -10.6. Additionally, the processing format decreased the total by -6.7 and the carbohydrate content resulted in a deduction of -4.5.
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 | 0.8 | 9.191 | +7.08 |
| Carb share of dry matter | 38.8% | -0.115 | -4.46 |
| Oil share of dry matter | 16.5% | -0.092 | -1.52 |
| Vegetable share of dry matter | 12.5% | -0.005 | -0.06 |
| Supplement share of dry matter | 10.2% | -0.012 | -0.13 |
| Undeclared quantities | 100.0% | -0.106 | -10.56 |
| 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 Baked | yes | -6.713 | -6.71 |
Show all 40 components
| Component | Input | Coefficient | Contribution |
|---|---|---|---|
| Base score | - | 30.909 | +30.91 |
| Average ingredient quality | 0.8 | 9.191 | +7.08 |
| Meat share of dry matter | 0.0% | 0.096 | +0.00 |
| Carb share of dry matter | 38.8% | -0.115 | -4.46 |
| Oil share of dry matter | 16.5% | -0.092 | -1.52 |
| Vegetable share of dry matter | 12.5% | -0.005 | -0.06 |
| Additive share of dry matter | 0.0% | 0.163 | +0.00 |
| Supplement share of dry matter | 10.2% | -0.012 | -0.13 |
| Other share of dry matter | 0.0% | -0.375 | +0.00 |
| Unrecognised share of dry matter | 0.0% | -0.027 | +0.00 |
| 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 | 100.0% | -0.106 | -10.56 |
| 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 | yes | -6.713 | -6.71 |
| 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
- +0.02
- Additives declared on label
- +1 transparency bonus
- Subtotal
- 47.8
- Final score
- 48/100
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 | 19 | 21.6 (band 18 to 40%) | 79.8 |
| Fat | 9 | 10.2 (band 5.5 to 20%) | 89.6 |
| Fibre | 2.3 | 2.6 (band 0.5 to 5%) | 98.2 |
| Calcium | 1.8 | 2 (band 0.5 to 2.5%) | 100 |
| Phosphorus | 1.2 | 1.4 (band 0.4 to 1.6%) | 100 |
| Calcium:phosphorus ratio | 1.5 | 1.5 (band 1 to 2%) | 100 |
| Energy (kcal/100g) | 336 | 381.8 | 100 |
Scored over 7 declared nutrients (combined weight 90); undeclared nutrients do not affect the score. Moisture was not declared and was estimated at 12% from the food type.
Declared fortification: 18 nutritional additives on the label
- Vitamin A 12.000 i. E.
- Vitamin D3 1.200 i. E.
- Vitamin E 70 mg
- Vitamin B1 10 mg
- Vitamin B2 10 mg
- Vitamin B6 6 mg
- Vitamin B12 30 mcg
- Niacin 40 mg
- Vitamin C 140 mg
- Pantothensäure als Calcium-D-Pantothenat 8 mg
- Biotin 250 mcg
- Folsäure 2 mg
- Eisen als Eisen-(II)-sulfat 175 mg
- Kupfer als Kupfer-(II)-Sulfat 10 mg/kg
- Mangan als Mangan-(II)-oxid 20 mg/kg
- Zink 125 mg/kg
- Jod als Calciumjodat, wasserfrei 2 mg/kg
- Selen 0,3 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.
| Item | Points |
|---|---|
| Ingredient list on the label (mandatory) | 10/10 |
| Printed percentages on the label (voluntary) - not on file | 0/20 |
| Analytical constituents declared (mandatory) - not on file | 0/15 |
| 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 (Analytical constituents 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.
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
- "Single Protein & getreidefrei" — supported by the declared single protein data.
- "getreidefrei" — supported by the declared grain-free data.
4 further claims on file that we cannot check against the label.
Moderate: every checkable claim is consistent with the declared label.
| Claim | Type | Check | Substantiation |
|---|---|---|---|
| schonend im Steinofen gebacken (on page) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| fördert den Speichelfluss beim Fressen, was die Verdauung unterstützt (on page) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| begünstigt eine starke Kaumuskulatur und gesunde Zähne (on page) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Single Protein & getreidefrei (on page) | Content | consistent | Manufacturer assertion |
| getreidefrei (on page) | Free-from | consistent | Manufacturer assertion |
| mit 100% Lamm im Fleischanteil (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 Pures Wohl mit Lamm
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.