GranataPet Liebling's Mahlzeit - Wild & Lachs
Wet Pate · completeClear label
Our verdict
Is GranataPet Liebling's Mahlzeit - Wild & Lachs a good dog food?
We score it 56/100 (Average). This reflects the ingredient quality, composition and label transparency of the recipe as declared on the label.
45% 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
- Doesn't list chicken, beef, turkey, lamb, pork, duck as ingredients
Consider something else if:
- Your dog avoids fish: it is listed as an ingredient
- Your dog avoids venison: it is listed as an ingredient
- You want a single-protein recipe: this one lists more than one animal protein
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 NaN% · Fat NaN%
Typical analysis (as fed)
| Nutrient | As fed |
|---|---|
| Protein | NaN% |
| Fat | NaN% |
| Fibre | NaN% |
| Ash | NaN% |
| Moisture | NaN% |
Additives & feeding info
No additives recorded yet.
Ingredients (14)45% of the recipe is estimated
Estimated composition
- unknown 65.4%
- meat 25.0%
- veg 8.0%
- supplement 1.1%
- oil 0.5%
| # | As declared | Matched | Label reading | Declared % | Est. % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Venison 45% consisting of muscle meat | Muscle Meat | meat · good | - | 20.0 |
| 2 | heart | Heart | meat · good | - | 20.0 |
| 3 | liver | Liver | meat · good | - | 5.0 |
| 4 | lung and Salmon 20% | Lung | meat · medium | 20 | 20.0 |
| 5 | Venison and Salmon broth 25.4% | Cooking broth | other · medium | 25.4 | 25.4 |
| 6 | Celery 2% | Celery Seeds | veg · good | 2 | 2.0 |
| 7 | Jerusalem artichoke 2% | Jerusalem Artichoke Powder | fibre · good | 2 | 2.0 |
| 8 | Beetroot 1% | Beetroot | veg · good | 1 | 1.0 |
| 9 | Fennel 1% | Fennel | veg · good | 1 | 1.0 |
| 10 | Apples 1% | Apples | veg · good | 1 | 1.0 |
| 11 | Pomegranate seeds 1% | Pomegranate Seeds | veg · good | 1 | 1.0 |
| 12 | Minerals 1% | Vitamins and minerals | supplement · medium | 1 | 1.0 |
| 13 | Rapeseed oil 0.5% | Rapeseed oil | oil · good | 0.5 | 0.5 |
| 14 | 0.05% naturally rich in glucosamine and chondroitin | Chondroitin | supplement · good | 0.05 | 0.05 |
- 1. Venison 45% consisting of muscle meat20.0% estimated
- 2. heart20.0% estimated
- 3. liver5.0% estimated
- 4. lung and Salmon 20%20% declared20.0% estimated
- 5. Venison and Salmon broth 25.4%25.4% declared25.4% estimated
- 6. Celery 2%2% declared2.0% estimated
- 7. Jerusalem artichoke 2%2% declared2.0% estimated
- 8. Beetroot 1%1% declared1.0% estimated
- 9. Fennel 1%1% declared1.0% estimated
- 10. Apples 1%1% declared1.0% estimated
- 11. Pomegranate seeds 1%1% declared1.0% estimated
- 12. Minerals 1%1% declared1.0% estimated
- 13. Rapeseed oil 0.5%0.5% declared0.5% estimated
- 14. 0.05% naturally rich in glucosamine and chondroitin0.05% declared0.05% estimated
Trust and sourceNo recalls recorded in our database · checked 2026-09-27
Brand and contact: GranataPet
- Website
- https://www.granatapet.de/
Trust and provenance
- Recall history
- No recalls recorded in our database
- Label data last checked
- 2026-09-27
- Scored with
- Model v3 (methodology)
- Product page
- www.granatapet.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: 4.7/5 · 441 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 product received a score of 56 out of 100. Ingredients without printed percentages contributed -4.8 to the total, pulling the score down because buyers cannot tell what share of the recipe each one represents. The overall quality of the ingredient list contributed +2, which helped lift the rating. On the other hand, ingredients we could not classify cost -2, and the processing format cost -0.7, so the final figure reflects both strengths and weaknesses.
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 | +1.99 |
| Oil share of dry matter | 1.2% | -0.092 | -0.11 |
| Vegetable share of dry matter | 2.8% | -0.005 | -0.01 |
| Supplement share of dry matter | 2.3% | -0.012 | -0.03 |
| Unrecognised share of dry matter | 77.2% | -0.027 | -2.05 |
| Undeclared quantities | 45.0% | -0.106 | -4.76 |
| Low meat (under 10% of dry matter) | yes | -3.158 | -3.16 |
| Processing multiplier | 1.00 | 33.786 | +33.79 |
| Processing: Wet Pate | yes | -0.672 | -0.67 |
Show all 40 components
| Component | Input | Coefficient | Contribution |
|---|---|---|---|
| Base score | - | 30.909 | +30.91 |
| Average ingredient quality | 0.2 | 9.191 | +1.99 |
| Meat share of dry matter | 0.0% | 0.096 | +0.00 |
| Carb share of dry matter | 0.0% | -0.115 | +0.00 |
| Oil share of dry matter | 1.2% | -0.092 | -0.11 |
| Vegetable share of dry matter | 2.8% | -0.005 | -0.01 |
| Additive share of dry matter | 0.0% | 0.163 | +0.00 |
| Supplement share of dry matter | 2.3% | -0.012 | -0.03 |
| Other share of dry matter | 0.0% | -0.375 | +0.00 |
| Unrecognised share of dry matter | 77.2% | -0.027 | -2.05 |
| 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 | 45.0% | -0.106 | -4.76 |
| 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) | 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 | 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 | yes | -0.672 | -0.67 |
| Processing: Wet Chunks | no | -0.672 | +0.00 |
- Processing-type offset
- -0.08
- Subtotal
- 55.8
- Final score
- 56/100
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
Analytical constituents not declared
No nutritional additives section declared on the label.
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 (55% of the recipe mass) (voluntary) | 11/20 |
| Analytical constituents declared (mandatory) - not on file | 0/15 |
| Additives declared (mandatory) - not on file | 0/10 |
| 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 (Analytical constituents declared, Additives declared, 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
No on-pack claims on file: nothing to verify.
The full scoring method is published. See the methodology for exactly how the headline score and each dimension are calculated.
Alternatives to Liebling's Mahlzeit - Wild & Lachs
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.