Our verdict
Is Naturavetal Chicken Puppy Meal a good dog food?
We score it 78/100 (Good). This reflects the ingredient quality, composition and label transparency of the recipe as declared on the label.
Who is this food for?
Suits
- Labelled by the manufacturer for puppies
- Grain-free: no grain ingredients listed
- Doesn't list beef, turkey, lamb, venison, pork, duck as ingredients
Consider something else if:
- Your dog avoids chicken: the label lists chicken
- Your dog avoids fish: the label lists cod liver oil
- You want a single-protein recipe: this one lists more than one animal protein
- You are limiting fat: 31.1% 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 11% · Fat 7%
Typical analysis (as fed)
| Nutrient | As fed |
|---|---|
| Protein | 11% |
| Fat | 7% |
| Fibre | 0.10% |
| Ash | 2.20% |
| Moisture | 77.50% |
| Calcium | 0.42% |
| Phosphorus | 0.32% |
Energy: 116 kcal/100g
Additives & feeding info
Feeding and storage
Storage
After opening keep covered for 4 days in the refrigerator or freeze in portions. Shelf life: 1 year after production.
Feeding guide
Amount of food per day, based on the dog's current body weight. Dogs up to the age of 7 months: approx. 5-8% of the body weight. From 7th to 12th month of life: approx. 3-5% of the body weight. From the age of 13 months, our Canis Plus® Complete Meals can be fed.
No additives recorded yet.
Ingredients (11)11 of 11 percentages printed
Estimated composition
- meat 70.0%
- other 20.0%
- veg 9.1%
- supplement 0.7%
- oil 0.1%
| # | As declared | Matched | Label reading | Declared % | Est. % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 21.67% meat | Chicken | meat · medium | 21.67 | 21.7 |
| 2 | 21.67% stomachs | Stomach | meat · medium | 21.67 | 21.7 |
| 3 | 5% liver | Chicken Liver | meat · good | 5 | 5.0 |
| 4 | 21.67% hearts | Chicken Heart | meat · good | 21.67 | 21.7 |
| 5 | Cooking broth 20% | Cooking broth | other · medium | 20 | 20.0 |
| 6 | Courgette/Zucchini 5% | Courgette | veg · good | 5 | 5.0 |
| 7 | Pumpkin 4% | Pumpkin | veg · good | 4 | 4.0 |
| 8 | Eggshell Powder 0.55% | Crushed Eggshells | supplement · good | 0.55 | 0.6 |
| 9 | Cod Liver Oil 0.15% | Cod Liver Oil | oil · good | 0.15 | 0.1 |
| 10 | Coconut Flakes 0.15% | Coconut Flakes | veg · medium | 0.15 | 0.1 |
| 11 | Seaweed Meal 0.15% | Seaweed Meal | supplement · medium | 0.15 | 0.1 |
- 1. 21.67% meat21.67% declared21.7% estimated
- 2. 21.67% stomachs21.67% declared21.7% estimated
- 3. 5% liver5% declared5.0% estimated
- 4. 21.67% hearts21.67% declared21.7% estimated
- 5. Cooking broth 20%20% declared20.0% estimated
- 6. Courgette/Zucchini 5%5% declared5.0% estimated
- 7. Pumpkin 4%4% declared4.0% estimated
- 8. Eggshell Powder 0.55%0.55% declared0.6% estimated
- 9. Cod Liver Oil 0.15%0.15% declared0.1% estimated
- 10. Coconut Flakes 0.15%0.15% declared0.1% estimated
- 11. Seaweed Meal 0.15%0.15% declared0.1% estimated
Trust and sourceNo recalls recorded in our database · checked 2026-09-19
Brand and contact: Naturavetal
- Contact page
- www.naturavetal.co.uk
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.naturavetal.co.uk
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: 4.5/5 · 14 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?
This food scored 78 out of 100. The meat content contributed +8.3 points, while the overall quality of the ingredient list added +6.4. The remaining ingredients deducted -1.6, and the processing format reduced the score by -0.7.
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 | +6.41 |
| Meat share of dry matter | 86.1% | 0.096 | +8.27 |
| Oil share of dry matter | 0.7% | -0.092 | -0.06 |
| Vegetable share of dry matter | 6.0% | -0.005 | -0.03 |
| Supplement share of dry matter | 2.8% | -0.012 | -0.03 |
| Other share of dry matter | 4.4% | -0.375 | -1.65 |
| High meat (30%+ of dry matter) | yes | 0.707 | +0.71 |
| Processing multiplier | 1.00 | 33.786 | +33.79 |
| Processing: Fresh Shelf | 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 | +6.41 |
| Meat share of dry matter | 86.1% | 0.096 | +8.27 |
| Carb share of dry matter | 0.0% | -0.115 | +0.00 |
| Oil share of dry matter | 0.7% | -0.092 | -0.06 |
| Vegetable share of dry matter | 6.0% | -0.005 | -0.03 |
| Additive share of dry matter | 0.0% | 0.163 | +0.00 |
| Supplement share of dry matter | 2.8% | -0.012 | -0.03 |
| Other share of dry matter | 4.4% | -0.375 | -1.65 |
| 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 | 0.0% | -0.106 | +0.00 |
| Prints ingredient percentages | no | 0.000 | +0.00 |
| Complete diet | no | 2.294 | +0.00 |
| 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 | yes | -0.672 | -0.67 |
| 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 | no | -0.672 | +0.00 |
- Processing-type offset
- -0.08
- Subtotal
- 77.6
- Final score
- 78/100
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 puppies and growth. 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.
Scored against FEDIAF growth minima; puppy scoring is under review.
| Nutrient | As fed (label) | Dry matter (scored) | Score |
|---|---|---|---|
| Protein | 11 | 48.9 | 100 |
| Fat | 7 | 31.1 | 100 |
| Calcium | 0.42 | 1.9 | 83.3 |
| Phosphorus | 0.32 | 1.4 | 100 |
| Calcium:phosphorus ratio | 1.3 | 1.3 | 100 |
| Energy (kcal/100g) | 116 | 515.6 | 100 |
Scored over 6 declared nutrients (combined weight 80); undeclared nutrients do not affect the score.
No nutritional additives section declared on the label.
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 (100% of the recipe mass) (voluntary) | 20/20 |
| Analytical constituents declared (mandatory) | 15/15 |
| Additives declared (mandatory) - not on file | 0/10 |
| 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 (Additives 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.
50/100 · limited — 2 checkable claims: 1 consistent, 1 contradicted.
Contradicted by the label
- "Single source protein - lots of tender chicken meat" — the declared label says otherwise on single protein.
Consistent with the label
- "grain free" — supported by the declared grain-free data.
5 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Easily digestible - suitable as a light diet (on page) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| grain free (on page) | Free-from | consistent | Manufacturer assertion |
| Single source protein - lots of tender chicken meat (on page) | Content | contradicted | Manufacturer assertion |
| guaranteed free from fillers, artificial antioxidants, colouring agents, preservatives, attractants and flavourings, synthetic vitamins (on pack) | Free-from | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Natural ingredients, without preservatives or additives (on page) | Free-from | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| guaranteed to be free of synthetic additives, binders or inferior bulking agents (on pack) | Free-from | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Complete meal, with cod liver oil & seaweed meal (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 Chicken Puppy Meal
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.