Our verdict
Is Rocco Sensitive Lamb with Rice a good dog food?
We score it 80/100 (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 adult dogs
- Doesn't list fish, venison, pork as ingredients
Consider something else if:
- Your dog avoids chicken: the label lists chicken
- Your dog avoids beef: the label lists beef
- Your dog avoids turkey: the label lists turkey
- Your dog avoids lamb: the label lists lamb lung
- Your dog avoids duck: the label lists duck
- Your dog avoids grain: the label lists rice - white
- You want a single-protein recipe: this one lists more than one animal protein
- You are limiting fat: 27.5% 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 9.50% · Fat 5.50%
Typical analysis (as fed)
| Nutrient | As fed |
|---|---|
| Protein | 9.50% |
| Fat | 5.50% |
| Fibre | 0.30% |
| Ash | 2.50% |
| Moisture | 80% |
Energy: 94 kcal/100g
Additives & feeding info
Feeding and storage
Storage
Once opened, keep refrigerated. Serve at room temperature.
Feeding guide
Complete wet food for adult dogs. Recommended servings should be adapted to the dog's individual needs to maintain ideal bodyweight. Ensure fresh drinking water is always available. Daily servings vary by dog weight, recipe and range from 310–480 g for 5 kg dogs to 1485–2285 g for 40 kg dogs.
Additives declared on the label
Nutritional additives
Vitamin D3 (140 IU); vitamin E (30 IU); copper [cupric(II)-sulphate-pentahydrate] (2.3mg); zinc [zinc sulphate monohydrate] (20mg); manganese [manganous(II)-oxide] (2mg); iodine [calcium iodate anhydrous] (0.5mg)
Ingredients (32)32 of 32 percentages printed
Estimated composition
- meat 81.9%
- other 9.9%
- carb 3.4%
- unknown 3.1%
- veg 1.1%
- supplement 0.6%
| # | As declared | Matched | Label reading | Declared % | Est. % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 13.75% lung | Lamb Lung | meat · medium | 13.75 | 13.8 |
| 2 | 13.75% tripe | Lamb Tripe | meat · medium | 13.75 | 13.8 |
| 3 | 13.75% meat | Lamb | meat · medium | 13.75 | 13.8 |
| 4 | 5% liver | Lambs Liver | meat · good | 5 | 5.0 |
| 5 | 13.75% heart | Lamb Heart | meat · good | 13.75 | 13.8 |
| 6 | broth (35%) | Cooking broth | other · medium | 35 | 35.0 |
| 7 | rice (4%) | Rice - white | carb · medium | 4 | 4.0 |
| 8 | minerals (1%) | Vitamins and minerals | supplement · medium | 1 | 1.0 |
| 9 | 13.75% meat | Chicken | meat · medium | 13.75 | 13.8 |
| 10 | 5% liver | Chicken Liver | meat · good | 5 | 5.0 |
| 11 | 13.75% stomach | Stomach | meat · medium | 13.75 | 13.8 |
| 12 | 13.75% heart | Chicken Heart | meat · good | 13.75 | 13.8 |
| 13 | 13.75% neck | Chicken Neck | meat · good | 13.75 | 13.8 |
| 14 | potato (4%) | Potatoes | carb · medium | 4 | 4.0 |
| 15 | 11% meat | Duck | meat · medium | 11 | 11.0 |
| 16 | 5% liver | Liver | meat · good | 5 | 5.0 |
| 17 | 11% paste | unmatched | - | 11 | 11.0 |
| 18 | 11% neck | Neck | meat · medium | 11 | 11.0 |
| 19 | 11% stomach | Stomach | meat · medium | 11 | 11.0 |
| 20 | 11% heart | Duck Heart | meat · good | 11 | 11.0 |
| 21 | pasta (4%) | Pasta | carb · medium | 4 | 4.0 |
| 22 | 13.75% meat | Turkey | meat · medium | 13.75 | 13.8 |
| 23 | 13.75% neck | Neck | meat · medium | 13.75 | 13.8 |
| 24 | 5% liver | Turkey liver | meat · good | 5 | 5.0 |
| 25 | 13.75% heart | Turkey Heart | meat · good | 13.75 | 13.8 |
| 26 | 13.75% stomach | Stomach | meat · medium | 13.75 | 13.8 |
| 27 | 13.75% meat | Beef | meat · medium | 13.75 | 13.8 |
| 28 | 13.75% tripe | Beef Tripe | meat · medium | 13.75 | 13.8 |
| 29 | 13.75% lung | Beef lung | meat · medium | 13.75 | 13.8 |
| 30 | 13.75% heart | Beef Heart | meat · good | 13.75 | 13.8 |
| 31 | 5% liver | Beef Liver | meat · good | 5 | 5.0 |
| 32 | carrot (4%) | Carrots | veg · good | 4 | 4.0 |
- 1. 13.75% lung13.75% declared13.8% estimated
- 2. 13.75% tripe13.75% declared13.8% estimated
- 3. 13.75% meat13.75% declared13.8% estimated
- 4. 5% liver5% declared5.0% estimated
- 5. 13.75% heart13.75% declared13.8% estimated
- 6. broth (35%)35% declared35.0% estimated
- 7. rice (4%)4% declared4.0% estimated
- 8. minerals (1%)1% declared1.0% estimated
- 9. 13.75% meat13.75% declared13.8% estimated
- 10. 5% liver5% declared5.0% estimated
- 11. 13.75% stomach13.75% declared13.8% estimated
- 12. 13.75% heart13.75% declared13.8% estimated
- 13. 13.75% neck13.75% declared13.8% estimated
- 14. potato (4%)4% declared4.0% estimated
- 15. 11% meat11% declared11.0% estimated
- 16. 5% liver5% declared5.0% estimated
- 17. 11% paste11% declared11.0% estimated
- 18. 11% neck11% declared11.0% estimated
- 19. 11% stomach11% declared11.0% estimated
- 20. 11% heart11% declared11.0% estimated
- 21. pasta (4%)4% declared4.0% estimated
- 22. 13.75% meat13.75% declared13.8% estimated
- 23. 13.75% neck13.75% declared13.8% estimated
- 24. 5% liver5% declared5.0% estimated
- 25. 13.75% heart13.75% declared13.8% estimated
- 26. 13.75% stomach13.75% declared13.8% estimated
- 27. 13.75% meat13.75% declared13.8% estimated
- 28. 13.75% tripe13.75% declared13.8% estimated
- 29. 13.75% lung13.75% declared13.8% estimated
- 30. 13.75% heart13.75% declared13.8% estimated
- 31. 5% liver5% declared5.0% estimated
- 32. carrot (4%)4% declared4.0% estimated
Trust and sourceNo recalls recorded in our database · checked 2026-09-14
Brand and contact: Rocco
Trust and provenance
- Recall history
- No recalls recorded in our database
- Label data last checked
- 2026-09-14
- Scored with
- Model v3 (methodology)
- Product page
- www.zooplus.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.
404 reviews on this product · 4.6/5
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 for this recipe is 80 out of 100. The meat content contributed +8.1 points, while the overall quality of the ingredient list added +5.8 points. Being labelled nutritionally complete gave the recipe +2.3 points, and printing percentages for most of the recipe provided a further +1 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 | 0.6 | 9.191 | +5.77 |
| Meat share of dry matter | 84.2% | 0.096 | +8.08 |
| Carb share of dry matter | 5.7% | -0.115 | -0.66 |
| Supplement share of dry matter | 1.9% | -0.012 | -0.02 |
| Other share of dry matter | 1.8% | -0.375 | -0.68 |
| Unrecognised share of dry matter | 5.7% | -0.027 | -0.15 |
| Complete diet | yes | 2.294 | +2.29 |
| High meat (30%+ of dry matter) | yes | 0.707 | +0.71 |
| 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 | 0.6 | 9.191 | +5.77 |
| Meat share of dry matter | 84.2% | 0.096 | +8.08 |
| Carb share of dry matter | 5.7% | -0.115 | -0.66 |
| Oil share of dry matter | 0.0% | -0.092 | +0.00 |
| Vegetable share of dry matter | 0.6% | -0.005 | -0.00 |
| Additive share of dry matter | 0.0% | 0.163 | +0.00 |
| Supplement share of dry matter | 1.9% | -0.012 | -0.02 |
| Other share of dry matter | 1.8% | -0.375 | -0.68 |
| Unrecognised share of dry matter | 5.7% | -0.027 | -0.15 |
| 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 | yes | 2.294 | +2.29 |
| 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 | 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
- 80.3
- Final score
- 80/100
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 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 | 9.5 | 47.5 (band 21.150000000000002 to 40%) | 100 |
| Fat | 5.5 | 27.5 (band 6.4625 to 20%) | 100 |
| Fibre | 0.3 | 1.5 (band 0.5 to 5%) | 83.3 |
| Energy (kcal/100g) | 94 | 470 | 100 |
Scored over 4 declared nutrients (combined weight 60); undeclared nutrients do not affect the score.
Declared fortification: 6 nutritional additives on the label
- Vitamin D3 (140 IU)
- vitamin E (30 IU)
- copper [cupric(II)-sulphate-pentahydrate] (2.3mg)
- zinc [zinc sulphate monohydrate] (20mg)
- manganese [manganous(II)-oxide] (2mg)
- iodine [calcium iodate anhydrous] (0.5mg)
Medium confidence: the full five-part analysis is on file; where moisture was not declared it was 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 (100% of the recipe mass) (voluntary) | 20/20 |
| Analytical constituents declared (mandatory) | 15/15 |
| Additives declared (mandatory) | 5/10 |
| 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 (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.
0/100 · limited — 1 checkable claim: 0 consistent, 1 contradicted.
Contradicted by the label
- "A high quality, sensitive complete wet dog food with only one source of animal protein and one source of carbohydrate in each variety." — the declared label says otherwise on single protein.
4 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| delicious meaty meal for sensitive dogs (on page) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| With an easily-digestible source of carbohydrates or vegetables (on page) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Minimum 60% meat and offal (on page) | Content | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| No added artificial colours or flavours (on page) | Free-from | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| A high quality, sensitive complete wet dog food with only one source of animal protein and one source of carbohydrate in each variety. (on page) | Content | contradicted | Manufacturer assertion |
The full scoring method is published. See the methodology for exactly how the headline score and each dimension are calculated.
Alternatives to Sensitive Lamb with Rice
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.