Our verdict
Is Salters Maintenance Dog Food a good dog food?
We score it 45/100 (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 maize, meat meal and rice as the main ingredients.
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 adult dogs
- Doesn't list beef, turkey, lamb, fish, venison, pork, duck as ingredients
Consider something else if:
- Your dog avoids chicken: the label lists chicken
- Your dog avoids grain: the label lists maize / corn
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
Storage
naturally stable stored under cool, dry conditions away from animal contact
Feeding guide
As a general rule, large breeds change from Puppy food to adult Maintenance food from 6 to 8 months and small breeds 10 to 12 months.
Additives declared on the label
Nutritional additives
vitamin A 24750 IU/kg; vitamin D3 2000 IU/kg; vitamin E (as alpha-tocopherol acetate) 347 IU/kg; iron (ferrous sulphate monohydrate) 33.0 mg/kg; iodine (calcium iodate anhydrous) 1.8 mg/kg; copper (cupric sulphate pentahydrate) 19.8 mg/kg; manganese (manganous oxide) 80.0 mg/kg; zinc (zinc oxide) 137.7 mg/kg; selenium (sodium selenite) 0.1 mg/kg
Technological additives
Tocopherol rich extracts of natural origin (vitamin E) as EC permitted antioxidant
Ingredients (15)100% of the recipe is estimated
Estimated composition
- carb 31.0%
- meat 21.4%
- oil 13.6%
- veg 11.9%
- fibre 11.6%
- supplement 10.4%
| # | As declared | Matched | Label reading | Declared % | Est. % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ground Maize | Maize / Corn | carb · medium | - | 8.7 |
| 2 | Chicken Meat Meal | Meat Meal | meat · medium | - | 8.4 |
| 3 | Round Grain Rice | Rice - white | carb · medium | - | 8.1 |
| 4 | Spray Dried Chicken Meal | Chicken | meat · medium | - | 7.8 |
| 5 | Chicken Fat | Chicken Oil and Fat | oil · good | - | 7.5 |
| 6 | Maize Gluten Meal | Maize gluten | carb · poor | - | 7.2 |
| 7 | Sunflower Meal | Sunflower Meal | carb · poor | - | 7.0 |
| 8 | Dried Sugar Beet Pulp | Beet Pulp | fibre · medium | - | 6.7 |
| 9 | Full Fat Linseed | Linseed | veg · good | - | 6.4 |
| 10 | Extra Virgin Olive Oil | Olive oil | oil · good | - | 6.1 |
| 11 | Yeast | Yeast | supplement · good | - | 5.8 |
| 12 | Natural Seaweed | Seaweed | veg · good | - | 5.5 |
| 13 | Dried Whole Egg | Dried Whole Egg | meat · good | - | 5.2 |
| 14 | Cellulose Fibre | Cellulose Fibre | fibre · medium | - | 4.9 |
| 15 | Vitamins and Minerals. | Vitamins and minerals | supplement · medium | - | 4.6 |
- 1. Ground Maize8.7% estimated
- 2. Chicken Meat Meal8.4% estimated
- 3. Round Grain Rice8.1% estimated
- 4. Spray Dried Chicken Meal7.8% estimated
- 5. Chicken Fat7.5% estimated
- 6. Maize Gluten Meal7.2% estimated
- 7. Sunflower Meal7.0% estimated
- 8. Dried Sugar Beet Pulp6.7% estimated
- 9. Full Fat Linseed6.4% estimated
- 10. Extra Virgin Olive Oil6.1% estimated
- 11. Yeast5.8% estimated
- 12. Natural Seaweed5.5% estimated
- 13. Dried Whole Egg5.2% estimated
- 14. Cellulose Fibre4.9% estimated
- 15. Vitamins and Minerals.4.6% estimated
Trust and sourceNo recalls recorded in our database · checked 2026-10-07
Brand and contact: Salters
- Website
- https://salterspetfood.com/
Trust and provenance
- Recall history
- No recalls recorded in our database
- Label data last checked
- 2026-10-07
- Scored with
- Model v3 (methodology)
- Product page
- salterspetfood.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?
This recipe achieves a final score of 45 out of 100 based on several key factors. The overall quality of the ingredient list added +4.1 points. However, ingredients without printed percentages reduced the score by -10.6. Additionally, the processing format deducted -6.7 and the carbohydrate content contributed -3.5.
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 | 0.4 | 9.191 | +4.07 |
| Carb share of dry matter | 30.1% | -0.115 | -3.47 |
| Oil share of dry matter | 14.7% | -0.092 | -1.36 |
| Vegetable share of dry matter | 11.7% | -0.005 | -0.06 |
| Supplement share of dry matter | 10.5% | -0.012 | -0.13 |
| Recipe graded poor | 14.2% | -0.065 | -0.92 |
| Number of poor ingredients | 2 | -0.876 | -1.75 |
| Largest single poor ingredient | 7.2% | 0.060 | +0.43 |
| 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 | -0.22 | 0.222 | -0.05 |
| 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 | 0.4 | 9.191 | +4.07 |
| Meat share of dry matter | 0.0% | 0.096 | +0.00 |
| Carb share of dry matter | 30.1% | -0.115 | -3.47 |
| Oil share of dry matter | 14.7% | -0.092 | -1.36 |
| Vegetable share of dry matter | 11.7% | -0.005 | -0.06 |
| Additive share of dry matter | 0.0% | 0.163 | +0.00 |
| Supplement share of dry matter | 10.5% | -0.012 | -0.13 |
| 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 | 14.2% | -0.065 | -0.92 |
| Poor-quality meat in recipe | 0.0% | -0.179 | +0.00 |
| Number of poor ingredients | 2 | -0.876 | -1.75 |
| Largest single poor ingredient | 7.2% | 0.060 | +0.43 |
| 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 | -0.22 | 0.222 | -0.05 |
| 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
- 44.7
- Final score
- 45/100
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
Analytical constituents not declared
Declared fortification: 9 nutritional additives on the label
- vitamin A 24750 IU/kg
- vitamin D3 2000 IU/kg
- vitamin E (as alpha-tocopherol acetate) 347 IU/kg
- iron (ferrous sulphate monohydrate) 33.0 mg/kg
- iodine (calcium iodate anhydrous) 1.8 mg/kg
- copper (cupric sulphate pentahydrate) 19.8 mg/kg
- manganese (manganous oxide) 80.0 mg/kg
- zinc (zinc oxide) 137.7 mg/kg
- selenium (sodium selenite) 0.1 mg/kg
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) | 10/10 |
| 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) | 5/5 |
Capped at 60: mandatory items missing (Analytical constituents declared).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| made from natural ingredients with the right balance of protein and energy (on page) | Content | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| we don't use any artificial colours, antioxidants or preservatives (on page) | Free-from | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| natural extract of Vitamin E (called 'topcopherol-rich extracts of natural origin') (on page) | Content | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| low sodium, low fat adult diet (on page) | High/low level | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| extra virgin olive oil (on page) | Content | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| optimum nutrition for adult dogs in peak condition (on page) | Functional | 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 Maintenance Dog Food
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.