Our verdict
Is Specific Medium Breed Puppy a good dog food?
We score it 43/100 (Poor). The main reasons are set out in "Why you might not" below, and every step of the calculation is shown under "How we calculated this score".
Complete extruded dry food for puppies, with wheat, fish meal and maize gluten as the main ingredients.
Only part of the analytical constituents are declared, so the nutritional picture is incomplete.
98% 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
- Labelling or feeding guide is aimed at medium dogs
- Doesn't list chicken, beef, turkey, lamb, venison, duck as ingredients
Consider something else if:
- Your dog avoids fish: the label lists fish meal
- Your dog avoids pork: the label lists pork fat
- Your dog avoids grain: the label lists wheat
- 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 feedingProtein 25.60% · Fat 14.30%
Typical analysis (as fed)
| Nutrient | As fed |
|---|---|
| Protein | 25.60% |
| Fat | 14.30% |
| Fibre | 2% |
| Moisture | 8.90% |
| Carbohydrates | 42.60% |
| Omega-3 fatty acids | 0.73% |
| Calcium | 0.97% |
| Phosphorus | 0.87% |
| Sodium | 0.28% |
Energy: 381 kcal/100g
Additives & feeding info
Feeding and storage
Feeding guide
Feeding guide in grams per day: Weight 2kg - 95g (25%), 80g (50%), 65g (75%), 55g (Adult); 2.5kg - 115/95/80/60; 3kg - 130/110/90/70; 4kg - 165/140/115/90; 5kg - 195/165/135/105; 6kg - 220/185/155/120; 7kg - 250/210/170/135; 8kg - 275/235/190/150; 10kg - 325/275/225/175; 12kg - 315/260/200; 14kg - 355/290/225; 16kg - 390/320/250; 18kg - 425/350/275; 22kg - 405/320; 25kg - 450/350
Additives declared on the label
Nutritional additives
vitamin D3 1044 IU/kg; copper 10.1 mg/kg (copper chelate of glycine hydrate); iron 108 mg/kg (ferrous sulphate monohydrate); zinc 129 mg/kg (zinc chelate of glycine hydrate); manganese 7.4 mg/kg (manganese chelate of glycine hydrate); iodine 2.5 mg/kg (calcium iodate anhydrous)
Technological additives
natural antioxidants
Ingredients (10)98% of the recipe is estimated
Estimated composition
- meat 34.2%
- carb 26.4%
- oil 20.2%
- fibre 9.8%
- supplement 9.3%
| # | As declared | Matched | Label reading | Declared % | Est. % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Wheat | Wheat | carb · poor | - | 14.0 |
| 2 | fish meal | Fish Meal | meat · medium | - | 13.2 |
| 3 | maize protein | Maize gluten | carb · poor | - | 12.4 |
| 4 | pork fat | Pork Fat | oil · medium | - | 11.7 |
| 5 | egg powder | Dried Whole Egg | meat · good | - | 10.9 |
| 6 | animal protein hydrolysate | Hydrolysed Animal Protein | meat · medium | - | 10.1 |
| 7 | beet pulp (2%) | Beet Pulp | fibre · medium | 2 | 2.0 |
| 8 | minerals | Vitamins and minerals | supplement · medium | - | 9.3 |
| 9 | fish oil | Fish Oil | oil · good | - | 8.6 |
| 10 | psyllium husk | Psyllium fibre | fibre · good | - | 7.8 |
- 1. Wheat14.0% estimated
- 2. fish meal13.2% estimated
- 3. maize protein12.4% estimated
- 4. pork fat11.7% estimated
- 5. egg powder10.9% estimated
- 6. animal protein hydrolysate10.1% estimated
- 7. beet pulp (2%)2% declared2.0% estimated
- 8. minerals9.3% estimated
- 9. fish oil8.6% estimated
- 10. psyllium husk7.8% estimated
Trust and sourceNo recalls recorded in our database · checked 2026-09-14
Brand and contact: Specific
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.specific-diets.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.
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 43 out of 100. Being labelled nutritionally complete adds +2.3 points to the total. However, ingredients without printed percentages deducts -10.3, the processing format takes away -6.7, and the carbohydrate content reduces the score by -2.9.
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 | +2.05 |
| Carb share of dry matter | 25.3% | -0.115 | -2.91 |
| Oil share of dry matter | 21.7% | -0.092 | -2.00 |
| Supplement share of dry matter | 9.3% | -0.012 | -0.11 |
| Recipe graded poor | 26.4% | -0.065 | -1.72 |
| Number of poor ingredients | 2 | -0.876 | -1.75 |
| Largest single poor ingredient | 14.0% | 0.060 | +0.84 |
| Undeclared quantities | 98.0% | -0.106 | -10.35 |
| Complete diet | yes | 2.294 | +2.29 |
| Low meat (under 10% of dry matter) | yes | -3.158 | -3.16 |
| 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 | +2.05 |
| Meat share of dry matter | 0.0% | 0.096 | +0.00 |
| Carb share of dry matter | 25.3% | -0.115 | -2.91 |
| Oil share of dry matter | 21.7% | -0.092 | -2.00 |
| 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 | 9.3% | -0.012 | -0.11 |
| 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 | 26.4% | -0.065 | -1.72 |
| Poor-quality meat in recipe | 0.0% | -0.179 | +0.00 |
| Number of poor ingredients | 2 | -0.876 | -1.75 |
| Largest single poor ingredient | 14.0% | 0.060 | +0.84 |
| Undeclared quantities | 98.0% | -0.106 | -10.35 |
| 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 | 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
- 42.5
- Final score
- 43/100
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 | 25.6 | 28.1 | 100 |
| Fat | 14.3 | 15.7 | 100 |
| Calcium | 0.97 | 1.1 | 100 |
| Phosphorus | 0.87 | 1 | 100 |
| Sodium | 0.28 | 0.3 (band 0.2300219538968167+%) | 100 |
| Calcium:phosphorus ratio | 1.1 | 1.1 | 100 |
| Omega fatty acids (omega-6 and omega-3) | - | - | 100 |
| Energy (kcal/100g) | 381 | 418.2 | 100 |
Omega fatty acids (omega-6 and omega-3): scored as the mean of its declared components (omega-3 100). The FEDIAF minimum for omega-6 is linoleic acid specifically.
Scored over 8 declared nutrients (combined weight 95); undeclared nutrients do not affect the score.
Declared fortification: 6 nutritional additives on the label
- vitamin D3 1044 IU/kg
- copper 10.1 mg/kg (copper chelate of glycine hydrate)
- iron 108 mg/kg (ferrous sulphate monohydrate)
- zinc 129 mg/kg (zinc chelate of glycine hydrate)
- manganese 7.4 mg/kg (manganese chelate of glycine hydrate)
- iodine 2.5 mg/kg (calcium iodate anhydrous)
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 (2% of the recipe mass) (voluntary) | 0.4/20 |
| Analytical constituents declared (mandatory) - not on file | 0/15 |
| 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) - not on file | 0/5 |
Capped at 60: mandatory items missing (Analytical constituents 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Contains no added artificial colours or flavourings (on pack) | provenance | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| high levels of Omega-3 from fish supporting brain and eye development and development of healthy coat, skin and joints (on page) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Beet pulp as a source of fermentable fibres to support beneficial microflora and intestinal health (on page) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Calcium and phosphorus levels are adjusted for teeth and bone growth (on page) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Added psyllium husk offers digestive support – absorbing water to firm up stools and regulating the digestive tract (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 Medium Breed Puppy
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.