Dibo IDEAL PUR (Rind/Geflügel)
Wet Chunks · completeHigh meatClear label
Our verdict
Is Dibo IDEAL PUR (Rind/Geflügel) a good dog food?
We score it 68/100 (Average). This reflects the ingredient quality, composition and label transparency of the recipe as declared on the label.
Complete wet food in chunks for dogs of all life stages, with heart, beef and beef liver as the main ingredients.
50% 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 all lifestages
- Grain-free: no grain ingredients listed
- Doesn't list lamb, fish, venison, pork, duck as ingredients
Consider something else if:
- Your dog avoids chicken: the label lists poultry
- Your dog avoids beef: the label lists beef
- Your dog avoids turkey: the label lists poultry
- You want a single-protein recipe: this one lists more than one animal protein
- You are limiting fat: 24.4% 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 10.80% · Fat 6.10%
Typical analysis (as fed)
| Nutrient | As fed |
|---|---|
| Protein | 10.80% |
| Fat | 6.10% |
| Fibre | 0.30% |
| Ash | 2.40% |
| Moisture | 75% |
Additives & feeding info
Feeding and storage
Storage
Bitte bewahren Sie unsere DIBO Nassfutterdosen an einem kühlen Ort auf, an dem sie vor direkter Sonneneinstrahlung geschützt sind. Nach dem öffnen können Sie den Inhalt der Dose 1-2 Tage im Kühlschrank aufbewahren.
Additives declared on the label
Nutritional additives
Vitamin D3 200 I.E./kg; Vitamin E all rac-alfa-Tocopherolacetat 30 I.E./kg; Zink als Zinksulfat; Monohydrat 15 mg/kg; Mangan als Mangan-II-sulfat; Monohydrat 3 mg/kg; Jod als Calciumjodat; wasserfrei 0.75 mg/kg
Ingredients (17)50% of the recipe is estimated
Estimated composition
- meat 70.0%
- other 29.0%
- supplement 1.0%
| # | As declared | Matched | Label reading | Declared % | Est. % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 40% consisting of beef heart | Heart | meat · good | 40 | 40.0 |
| 2 | beef | Beef | meat · medium | - | 0.0 |
| 3 | beef liver | Beef Liver | meat · good | - | 0.0 |
| 4 | beef lung | Beef lung | meat · medium | - | 0.0 |
| 5 | beef tripe | Beef Tripe | meat · medium | - | 0.0 |
| 6 | 29% broth | Cooking broth | other · medium | 29 | 29.0 |
| 7 | 20% consisting of poultry heart | Heart | meat · good | 20 | 20.0 |
| 8 | poultry meat | Poultry | meat · medium | - | 0.0 |
| 9 | poultry liver | Chicken Liver | meat · good | - | 0.0 |
| 10 | poultry gizzards | Chicken Stomachs | meat · medium | - | 0.0 |
| 11 | poultry necks | Neck | meat · medium | - | 0.0 |
| 12 | 10% consisting of liver | Liver | meat · good | 10 | 10.0 |
| 13 | heart | Heart | meat · good | - | 0.0 |
| 14 | lung | Lung | meat · medium | - | 0.0 |
| 15 | meat | Fresh Meat | meat · medium | - | 0.0 |
| 16 | throat | Throat | meat · medium | - | 0.0 |
| 17 | 1% minerals | Vitamins and minerals | supplement · medium | 1 | 1.0 |
- 1. 40% consisting of beef heart40% declared40.0% estimated
- 2. beef0.0% estimated
- 3. beef liver0.0% estimated
- 4. beef lung0.0% estimated
- 5. beef tripe0.0% estimated
- 6. 29% broth29% declared29.0% estimated
- 7. 20% consisting of poultry heart20% declared20.0% estimated
- 8. poultry meat0.0% estimated
- 9. poultry liver0.0% estimated
- 10. poultry gizzards0.0% estimated
- 11. poultry necks0.0% estimated
- 12. 10% consisting of liver10% declared10.0% estimated
- 13. heart0.0% estimated
- 14. lung0.0% estimated
- 15. meat0.0% estimated
- 16. throat0.0% estimated
- 17. 1% minerals1% declared1.0% estimated
Trust and sourceNo recalls recorded in our database · checked 2026-08-22
Brand and contact: Dibo
- Website
- https://www.dibo.de/
Trust and provenance
- Recall history
- No recalls recorded in our database
- Label data last checked
- 2026-08-22
- Scored with
- Model v3 (methodology)
- Product page
- www.dibo.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.
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 final score of 68 out of 100. The overall quality of the ingredient list contributed +6.4 points, and the meat content contributed +2.4 points to the total. However, ingredients without printed percentages reduced the score by -5.3 points, and the remaining ingredients added a further deduction of -2.5 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 | 0.7 | 9.191 | +6.35 |
| Meat share of dry matter | 25.5% | 0.096 | +2.45 |
| Supplement share of dry matter | 4.2% | -0.012 | -0.05 |
| Other share of dry matter | 6.6% | -0.375 | -2.47 |
| Undeclared quantities | 50.0% | -0.106 | -5.28 |
| Complete diet | yes | 2.294 | +2.29 |
| Processing multiplier | 1.00 | 33.786 | +33.79 |
| Processing: Wet Chunks | yes | -0.672 | -0.67 |
Show all 40 components
| Component | Input | Coefficient | Contribution |
|---|---|---|---|
| Base score | - | 30.909 | +30.91 |
| Average ingredient quality | 0.7 | 9.191 | +6.35 |
| Meat share of dry matter | 25.5% | 0.096 | +2.45 |
| 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 | 0.0% | -0.005 | +0.00 |
| Additive share of dry matter | 0.0% | 0.163 | +0.00 |
| Supplement share of dry matter | 4.2% | -0.012 | -0.05 |
| Other share of dry matter | 6.6% | -0.375 | -2.47 |
| 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 | 50.0% | -0.106 | -5.28 |
| 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) | 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 | no | -0.672 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Wet Chunks | yes | -0.672 | -0.67 |
- Processing-type offset
- -0.08
- Additives declared on label
- +1 transparency bonus
- Subtotal
- 68.2
- Final score
- 68/100
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.
Score history across model versions
The score shown above is always computed with the latest published model. Earlier scores are kept for the record and are never edited or deleted; a scoring change ships as a new model version with a public write-up 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 | 10.8 | 43.2 (band 18 to 40%) | 100 |
| Fat | 6.1 | 24.4 (band 5.5 to 20%) | 100 |
| Fibre | 0.3 | 1.2 (band 0.5 to 5%) | 79.3 |
Scored over 3 declared nutrients (combined weight 50); undeclared nutrients do not affect the score.
Declared fortification: 8 nutritional additives on the label
- Vitamin D3 200 I.E./kg
- Vitamin E all rac-alfa-Tocopherolacetat 30 I.E./kg
- Zink als Zinksulfat
- Monohydrat 15 mg/kg
- Mangan als Mangan-II-sulfat
- Monohydrat 3 mg/kg
- Jod als Calciumjodat
- wasserfrei 0.75 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 (50% of the recipe mass) (voluntary) | 10/20 |
| 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) - 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.
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.
0/100 · limited — 1 checkable claim: 0 consistent, 1 contradicted.
Contradicted by the label
- "fettarm" — the declared label says otherwise on low fat.
27 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| gute Alternative zum BARF Futter (on page) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| fördert eine gesunde Verdauung (on page) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| unterstützt die Darmfunktion (on page) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| wirkt Verstopfungen entgegen (on page) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| von besonders hoher Verträglichkeit (on page) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| bieten ihrem Hund essentielle Aminosäuren (on page) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| die von großer Bedeutung für den Muskelaufbau und der allgemeine Gesundheit sind (on page) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| findet unser Nassfutter Pur Ideal-Mix große Beliebtheit bei Vierbeinern, die auf ihr Gewicht achten müssen (on page) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Biologisch Artgerechte Rohfütterung (on page) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| 20 % bestehend aus Geflügelherz, Geflügelfleisch, Geflügelleber, Geflügelmägen, Geflügelhälse (on pack) | Content | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| leckeres vom Rind und Geflügel (on page) | Content | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Ein wertvoller Mix aus Rind- und Geflügelfleisch (on page) | Content | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| ohne Konservierungsmittel (on page) | Free-from | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Mit seinem idealen Gemisch aus Geflügel- und Rindfleisch mit einem hohem Feuchtigkeitsgehalt (on page) | Content | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Fettgehalt 6,1 % (on pack) | Nutrient | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| fettarm (on page) | Nutrient | contradicted | Manufacturer assertion |
| IDEAL PUR (Rind/Geflügel) (on page) | Content | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Protein 10,8 % (on pack) | Nutrient | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Geflügelfleisch eher mager ist (on page) | Content | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| mit wertvollen Vitaminen und Nährstoffen (on page) | Content | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Feuchtigkeit 75,0 % (on pack) | Nutrient | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Rohasche 2,4 % (on pack) | Nutrient | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| 40 % bestehend aus Rinderherz, Rindfleisch, Rinderleber, Rinderlunge, Rinderpansen (on pack) | Content | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| bietet beste Nährstoffe (on page) | Content | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Rohfaser 0,3 % (on pack) | Nutrient | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| 1% Mineralstoffe (on pack) | Content | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| bei einem geringen Fettgehalt von nur 6,1% (on page) | Nutrient | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| exzellente Lieferanten hochwertiger Proteine (on page) | High/low level | 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 IDEAL PUR (Rind/Geflügel)
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.