Obeythepaw Turkey & Beef Blend
Raw · completeHigh meat
Our verdict
Is Obeythepaw Turkey & Beef Blend a good dog food?
We score it 62/100 (Average). This reflects the ingredient quality, composition and label transparency of the recipe as declared on the label.
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 all lifestages
- Grain-free: no grain ingredients listed
- Doesn't list chicken, lamb, fish, venison, pork, duck as ingredients
Consider something else if:
- Your dog avoids beef: the label lists beef muscle meat
- Your dog avoids turkey: the label lists finely ground turkey bone
- 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 feeding
Typical analysis (as fed)
No analysis recorded yet.
Additives & feeding info
Feeding and storage
Feeding guide
Place 2% to 3% of your dog's body weight in their bowl to thaw, feed when ready.
No additives recorded yet.
Ingredients (5)100% of the recipe is estimated
Estimated composition
- meat 77.5%
- supplement 22.5%
| # | As declared | Matched | Label reading | Declared % | Est. % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Turkey Necks | Neck | meat · medium | - | 25.0 |
| 2 | Turkey Bone | Finely Ground Turkey Bone | supplement · good | - | 22.5 |
| 3 | beef muscle meat | Beef muscle meat | meat · good | - | 20.0 |
| 4 | Beef liver | Beef Liver | meat · good | - | 17.5 |
| 5 | Beef kidney | Beef Kidney | meat · good | - | 15.0 |
- 1. Turkey Necks25.0% estimated
- 2. Turkey Bone22.5% estimated
- 3. beef muscle meat20.0% estimated
- 4. Beef liver17.5% estimated
- 5. Beef kidney15.0% estimated
Trust and sourceNo recalls recorded in our database · checked 2026-09-20
Brand and contact: Obeythepaw
- Website
- https://www.obeythepaw.com/
Trust and provenance
- Recall history
- No recalls recorded in our database
- Label data last checked
- 2026-09-20
- Scored with
- Model v3 (methodology)
- Product page
- www.obeythepaw.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.
Brand and retailer reviews
External platform ratings are not scores for this individual recipe.
Trustpilot: 4.3/5 · 331 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 overall score is 62 out of 100. Undeclared ingredient shares contributed -10.6 points because the recipe includes ingredients without printed percentages. The overall quality of the ingredient list contributed +7.3 points, and being labelled nutritionally complete contributed +2.3 points. Finally, the added vitamins and minerals contributed -0.6 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 | 0.8 | 9.191 | +7.32 |
| Supplement share of dry matter | 48.8% | -0.012 | -0.60 |
| 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 |
| Processing multiplier | 1.12 | 33.786 | +37.84 |
| Processing: Raw | yes | -0.054 | -0.05 |
Show all 40 components
| Component | Input | Coefficient | Contribution |
|---|---|---|---|
| Base score | - | 30.909 | +30.91 |
| Average ingredient quality | 0.8 | 9.191 | +7.32 |
| 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 | 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 | 48.8% | -0.012 | -0.60 |
| 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 | 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 | 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 | 0.00 | 0.222 | +0.00 |
| Processing multiplier | 1.12 | 33.786 | +37.84 |
| Processing: Raw | yes | -0.054 | -0.05 |
| 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 | no | -0.672 | +0.00 |
- Processing-type offset
- -1.74
- Subtotal
- 62.3
- Final score
- 62/100
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 (voluntary) - not on file | 0/20 |
| 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) | 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 (Analytical constituents declared, 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.
Claims on file; none we can check against the label
| Claim | Type | Check | Substantiation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Helps prevent frequent vet visits, extends the life of your best friend. Keeps their coat shiny & healthy, helps with weight control, improves their digestive system & much more!! (on page) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| USDA Approved, Human Grade (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 Turkey & Beef Blend
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.