Our verdict
Is Nood Puppy Dinners with Chicken a good dog food?
We score it 47/100 (Average). This reflects the ingredient quality, composition and label transparency of the recipe as declared on the label.
Complete wet food in chunks for puppies, with chicken, plasma protein and pork as the main ingredients.
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 puppies
- Grain-free: no grain ingredients listed
- Doesn't list beef, turkey, lamb, fish, venison, duck as ingredients
Consider something else if:
- Your dog avoids chicken: the label lists chicken
- Your dog avoids pork: it is listed as an ingredient
- You want a single-protein recipe: this one lists more than one animal protein
- You are limiting fat: 27.3% 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 7% · Fat 3%
Typical analysis (as fed)
| Nutrient | As fed |
|---|---|
| Protein | 7% |
| Fat | 3% |
| Fibre | 2.40% |
| Moisture | 89% |
| Calcium | 0.18% |
| Phosphorus | 0.18% |
Additives & feeding info
Additives declared on the label
Nutritional additives
Choline Chloride; Vitamin E Supplement; Pyridoxine Hydrochloride; Thiamine Mononitrate; Riboflavin; Menadione Sodium Bisulfate Complex; Cobalamin; Vitamin A; Vitamin D3; Magnesium Sulphate; Zinc Oxide; Calcium Pantothenate; Copper Sulphate Pentahydrate; Manganese Sulphate Monohydrate; Calcium Iodate Anhydrous; Ascorbic Acid
Ingredients (22)100% of the recipe is estimated
Estimated composition
- additive 32.7%
- meat 23.1%
- veg 14.5%
- supplement 13.8%
- fibre 7.3%
- carb 5.4%
- other 3.1%
| # | As declared | Matched | Label reading | Declared % | Est. % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Chicken | Chicken | meat · medium | - | 6.0 |
| 2 | Chicken By-Products | By-products | meat · medium | - | 5.8 |
| 3 | Animal Plasma | Plasma Protein | meat · medium | - | 5.7 |
| 4 | Pork By-Products | By-products | meat · medium | - | 5.6 |
| 5 | Tapioca Starch | Tapioca Starch | carb · medium | - | 5.4 |
| 6 | Natural Flavour | Smoked Flavour | additive · poor | - | 5.3 |
| 7 | Sodium Tripolyphosphate | Sodium Tripolyphosphate | additive · poor | - | 5.2 |
| 8 | Salt | Salt | additive · poor | - | 5.0 |
| 9 | Vitamins (Choline Chloride, Vitamin E Supplement, Pyridoxine Hydrochloride, Thiamine Mononitrate, Riboflavin, Menadione Sodium Bisulfate Complex, Cobalamin, Vitamin A, Vitamin D3) | Vitamins and minerals | supplement · medium | - | 4.9 |
| 10 | Minerals (Magnesium Sulphate, Zinc Oxide, Calcium Pantothenate, Copper Sulphate Pentahydrate, Manganese Sulphate Monohydrate, Calcium Iodate Anhydrous) | Vitamins and minerals | supplement · medium | - | 4.7 |
| 11 | Xanthan Gum | Xanthan gum | additive · medium | - | 4.6 |
| 12 | Caramel | Caramel Colour | additive · poor | - | 4.5 |
| 13 | Guar Gum | Guar gum | additive · medium | - | 4.3 |
| 14 | Ascorbic Acid | Vitamin C | supplement · good | - | 4.2 |
| 15 | Dried Plain Beet Pulp | Beet Pulp | fibre · medium | - | 4.1 |
| 16 | Dried Chicory Root | Chicory root | veg · good | - | 3.9 |
| 17 | Carrageenan | Carrageenan | additive · poor | - | 3.8 |
| 18 | Cranberries | Cranberries | veg · good | - | 3.7 |
| 19 | Blueberries | Blueberries | veg · good | - | 3.5 |
| 20 | Spinach | Spinach | veg · good | - | 3.4 |
| 21 | Inulin | Inulin | fibre · good | - | 3.3 |
| 22 | Water Sufficient for Processing | Water | other | - | 3.1 |
- 1. Chicken6.0% estimated
- 2. Chicken By-Products5.8% estimated
- 3. Animal Plasma5.7% estimated
- 4. Pork By-Products5.6% estimated
- 5. Tapioca Starch5.4% estimated
- 6. Natural Flavour5.3% estimated
- 7. Sodium Tripolyphosphate5.2% estimated
- 8. Salt5.0% estimated
- 9. Vitamins (Choline Chloride, Vitamin E Supplement, Pyridoxine Hydrochloride, Thiamine Mononitrate, Riboflavin, Menadione Sodium Bisulfate Complex, Cobalamin, Vitamin A, Vitamin D3)4.9% estimated
- 10. Minerals (Magnesium Sulphate, Zinc Oxide, Calcium Pantothenate, Copper Sulphate Pentahydrate, Manganese Sulphate Monohydrate, Calcium Iodate Anhydrous)4.7% estimated
- 11. Xanthan Gum4.6% estimated
- 12. Caramel4.5% estimated
- 13. Guar Gum4.3% estimated
- 14. Ascorbic Acid4.2% estimated
- 15. Dried Plain Beet Pulp4.1% estimated
- 16. Dried Chicory Root3.9% estimated
- 17. Carrageenan3.8% estimated
- 18. Cranberries3.7% estimated
- 19. Blueberries3.5% estimated
- 20. Spinach3.4% estimated
- 21. Inulin3.3% estimated
- 22. Water Sufficient for Processing3.1% estimated
Trust and sourceNo recalls recorded in our database · checked 2026-09-15
Brand and contact: Nood
- Website
- https://noodpetfood.com/
Trust and provenance
- Recall history
- No recalls recorded in our database
- Label data last checked
- 2026-09-15
- Scored with
- Model v3 (methodology)
- Product page
- noodpetfood.com
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?
The product scored 47 out of 100. Ingredients without printed percentages contributed -10.6 points and the additive load contributed -8.8 points, both reducing the score. The additives in the recipe contributed +7.8 points and being labelled nutritionally complete contributed +2.3 points, both increasing the score.
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 | 0.1 | 9.191 | +0.74 |
| Carb share of dry matter | 2.2% | -0.115 | -0.25 |
| Vegetable share of dry matter | 8.3% | -0.005 | -0.04 |
| Additive share of dry matter | 47.7% | 0.163 | +7.77 |
| Supplement share of dry matter | 20.6% | -0.012 | -0.25 |
| Recipe graded poor | 23.7% | -0.065 | -1.54 |
| Number of poor ingredients | 5 | -0.876 | -4.38 |
| Largest single poor ingredient | 5.3% | 0.060 | +0.32 |
| 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 |
| Additive penalty | -39.49 | 0.222 | -8.77 |
| 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 | 0.1 | 9.191 | +0.74 |
| Meat share of dry matter | 0.0% | 0.096 | +0.00 |
| Carb share of dry matter | 2.2% | -0.115 | -0.25 |
| Oil share of dry matter | 0.0% | -0.092 | +0.00 |
| Vegetable share of dry matter | 8.3% | -0.005 | -0.04 |
| Additive share of dry matter | 47.7% | 0.163 | +7.77 |
| Supplement share of dry matter | 20.6% | -0.012 | -0.25 |
| 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 | 23.7% | -0.065 | -1.54 |
| Poor-quality meat in recipe | 0.0% | -0.179 | +0.00 |
| Number of poor ingredients | 5 | -0.876 | -4.38 |
| Largest single poor ingredient | 5.3% | 0.060 | +0.32 |
| 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 | -39.49 | 0.222 | -8.77 |
| 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
- 47.1
- Final score
- 47/100
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 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 | 7 | 63.6 | 100 |
| Fat | 3 | 27.3 | 100 |
| Calcium | 0.18 | 1.6 | 97.7 |
| Phosphorus | 0.18 | 1.6 | 100 |
| Calcium:phosphorus ratio | 1 | 1 | 100 |
Scored over 5 declared nutrients (combined weight 70); undeclared nutrients do not affect the score.
Declared fortification: 16 nutritional additives on the label
- Choline Chloride
- Vitamin E Supplement
- Pyridoxine Hydrochloride
- Thiamine Mononitrate
- Riboflavin
- Menadione Sodium Bisulfate Complex
- Cobalamin
- Vitamin A
- Vitamin D3
- Magnesium Sulphate
- Zinc Oxide
- Calcium Pantothenate
- Copper Sulphate Pentahydrate
- Manganese Sulphate Monohydrate
- Calcium Iodate Anhydrous
- Ascorbic Acid
Low confidence: partial analysis or moisture 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) - 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, 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.
100/100 · strong — 3 checkable claims: 3 consistent, 0 contradicted.
Consistent with the label
- "Complete & Balanced Wet Food for Dogs" — supported by the declared complete and balanced data.
- "complete and balanced diet" — supported by the declared complete and balanced data.
- "high-quality protein" — supported by the declared high protein data.
10 further claims on file that we cannot check against the label.
Strong: at least three checkable claims, all consistent with the declared label, and no compliance cap.
| Claim | Type | Check | Substantiation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Glossy Coats (on page) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Happy Tummies (on page) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Increased Vitality (on page) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| helps your puppy develop strong muscles and bones (on page) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| for lean muscle development (on page) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| contains cage-free chicken as the very first ingredient (on page) | Content | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Complete & Balanced Wet Food for Dogs (on page) | Content | consistent | Manufacturer assertion |
| Premium Puppy Dinners with Chicken (on page) | Content | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| packed full of the good stuff (on page) | Content | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| complete and balanced diet (on page) | Content | consistent | Manufacturer assertion |
| high-quality protein (on page) | High/low level | consistent | Manufacturer assertion |
| packed full of premium ingredients (on page) | High/low level | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| no pesky fine print (on page) | Free-from | 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 Puppy Dinners with Chicken
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.