Nutrivet Super Premium Energy

Dry Extruded · complete

49out of 100

Average

our rating

Our verdict

Is Nutrivet Super Premium Energy a good dog food?

We score it 49/100 (Average). This reflects the ingredient quality, composition and label transparency of the recipe as declared on the label.

Complete extruded dry food for adult dogs, with chicken, lentils and maize as the main ingredients.

How we score

70% of this recipe has no printed percentage. Estimated shares are model estimates, not label facts.

Why you might choose it

High in protein: 33% protein on a dry-matter basis.
Declares energy content, which most labels omit.
Nutritionally complete: formulated to be fed as the whole diet.

Why you might not

3 poor-graded ingredients make up about 28% of the recipe.
High in fat: 22% fat on a dry-matter basis.
70% of the recipe mass has no printed percentage, so the exact split cannot be verified.

Who is this food for?

Suits

Labelled by the manufacturer for adult dogs
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 fish oil
Your dog avoids grain: the label lists maize / corn
You want a single-protein recipe: this one lists more than one animal protein
You are limiting fat: 22.2% 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 30% · Fat 20%

Typical analysis (as fed)

Nutrient	As fed
Protein	30%
Fat	20%
Fibre	2.50%
Ash	7.50%
Moisture	10%
Calcium	1.40%
Phosphorus	1%

Energy: 410 kcal/100g

Additives & feeding info

Feeding and storage

Storage

Store in a cool, dry place.

Feeding guide

See feeding table on packaging based on dog's weight and activity level.

Additives declared on the label

Nutritional additives

Vitamin A 20000 IU/kg; Vitamin D3 1500 IU/kg; Vitamin E 100 mg/kg; Iron 85 mg/kg; Iodine 2 mg/kg; Copper 10 mg/kg; Manganese 40 mg/kg; Zinc 130 mg/kg; Selenium 0.2 mg/kg

Technological additives

Antioxidants

Ingredients (11)70% of the recipe is estimated

Estimated composition

meat 37.8%
carb 28.3%
oil 15.0%
supplement 11.7%
fibre 7.2%

#	As declared	Matched	Label reading	Declared %	Est. %
1	Chicken	Chicken	meat · medium	-	11.8
2	min	Lentils	veg · medium	-	11.2
3	corn	Maize / Corn	carb · medium	-	10.7
4	wheat	Wheat	carb · poor	-	10.2
5	rice	Rice - white	carb · medium	-	9.6
6	animal fat	Unspecified Animal Fats and Oils	oil · poor	-	9.1
7	hydrolysed animal protein	Hydrolysed Animal Protein	meat · medium	-	8.6
8	beet pulp	Beet Pulp	fibre · medium	-	8.0
9	fish oil	Fish Oil	oil · good	-	7.5
10	brewer's yeast	Brewer's Yeast	supplement · good	-	7.0
11	minerals	Vitamins and minerals	supplement · medium	-	6.4

1. Chicken11.8% estimated
Chicken · meat · medium
2. min11.2% estimated
Lentils · veg · medium
3. corn10.7% estimated
Maize / Corn · carb · medium
4. wheat10.2% estimated
Wheat · carb · poor
5. rice9.6% estimated
Rice - white · carb · medium
6. animal fat9.1% estimated
Unspecified Animal Fats and Oils · oil · poor
7. hydrolysed animal protein8.6% estimated
Hydrolysed Animal Protein · meat · medium
8. beet pulp8.0% estimated
Beet Pulp · fibre · medium
9. fish oil7.5% estimated
Fish Oil · oil · good
10. brewer's yeast7.0% estimated
Brewer's Yeast · supplement · good
11. minerals6.4% estimated
Vitamins and minerals · supplement · medium

Trust and sourceNo recalls recorded in our database · checked 2026-09-09

Brand and contact: Nutrivet

Website: https://www.nutrivet.fr/

Trust and provenance

Recall history: No recalls recorded in our database
Label data last checked: 2026-09-09
Scored with: Model v3 (methodology)
Product page: www.nutrivet.fr

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 an overall score of 49 out of 100. Being labelled nutritionally complete adds +2.3 points to the total. However, ingredients without printed percentages deducts -7.4, the processing format takes away -6.7, and the carbohydrate content reduces the score by -4.

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	+2.22
Meat share of dry matter	11.6%	0.096	+1.11
Carb share of dry matter	34.4%	-0.115	-3.95
Oil share of dry matter	20.5%	-0.092	-1.88
Supplement share of dry matter	14.8%	-0.012	-0.18
Recipe graded poor	17.8%	-0.065	-1.16
Number of poor ingredients	2	-0.876	-1.75
Largest single poor ingredient	9.4%	0.060	+0.57
Undeclared quantities	70.0%	-0.106	-7.39
Complete diet	yes	2.294	+2.29
Additive penalty	-0.25	0.222	-0.06
Processing multiplier	0.98	33.786	+33.11
Processing: Dry Extruded	yes	-6.713	-6.71

Show all 40 components

Component	Input	Coefficient	Contribution
Base score	-	30.909	+30.91
Average ingredient quality	0.2	9.191	+2.22
Meat share of dry matter	11.6%	0.096	+1.11
Carb share of dry matter	34.4%	-0.115	-3.95
Oil share of dry matter	20.5%	-0.092	-1.88
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	14.8%	-0.012	-0.18
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	17.8%	-0.065	-1.16
Poor-quality meat in recipe	0.0%	-0.179	+0.00
Number of poor ingredients	2	-0.876	-1.75
Largest single poor ingredient	9.4%	0.060	+0.57
Undeclared quantities	70.0%	-0.106	-7.39
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	-0.25	0.222	-0.06
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	no	-6.713	+0.00
Processing: Dry Extruded	yes	-6.713	-6.71
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: +2 transparency bonus
Subtotal: 49.1
Final score: 49/100

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.

Model	Score
v3	49/100	current
v2	46/100
v1	51/100
v1.9	51/100

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	30	33.3 (band 20.5 to 40%)	100
Fat	20	22.2 (band 6.263888888888888 to 20%)	100
Fibre	2.5	2.8 (band 0.5 to 5%)	100
Calcium	1.4	1.6 (band 0.5694444444444444 to 2.5%)	100
Phosphorus	1	1.1 (band 0.45555555555555555 to 1.6%)	100
Calcium:phosphorus ratio	1.4	1.4 (band 1 to 2%)	94
Energy (kcal/100g)	410	455.6	50

Scored over 7 declared nutrients (combined weight 90); undeclared nutrients do not affect the score.

Portion-control flag: 410 kcal/100g as fed with fat at 22.2% dry matter, above the reference band. High-energy foods need smaller portions.

Declared fortification: 9 nutritional additives on the label

Vitamin A 20000 IU/kg
Vitamin D3 1500 IU/kg
Vitamin E 100 mg/kg
Iron 85 mg/kg
Iodine 2 mg/kg
Copper 10 mg/kg
Manganese 40 mg/kg
Zinc 130 mg/kg
Selenium 0.2 mg/kg

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 (30% of the recipe mass) (voluntary)	6/20
✓ Analytical constituents declared (mandatory)	15/15
✓ Additives declared (mandatory)	10/10
✓ 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)	5/5

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.

Claims on file; none we can check against the label