Our verdict
Is Vale Raw Succulent Salmon a good dog food?
We score it 71/100 (Good). This reflects the ingredient quality, composition and label transparency of the recipe as declared on the label.
Complete extruded dry food for dogs of all life stages, with salmon, sweet potatoes and peas as the main ingredients.
Who is this food for?
Suits
- Labelled by the manufacturer for all lifestages
- Grain-free: no grain ingredients listed
- Single named protein: fish
- Doesn't list chicken, beef, turkey, lamb, venison, pork, duck as ingredients
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 26% · Fat 12%
Typical analysis (as fed)
| Nutrient | As fed |
|---|---|
| Protein | 26% |
| Fat | 12% |
| Fibre | 3.50% |
| Ash | 7.50% |
| Moisture | 8% |
| Omega-3 fatty acids | 2.40% |
| Omega-6 fatty acids | 1.10% |
| Calcium | 1.10% |
| Phosphorus | 1% |
Additives & feeding info
Feeding and storage
Feeding guide
Detailed feeding guide by expected adult weight and age band (2-6, 6-9, 9-12, 12-15 months and adult) provided on the page; e.g. adult 1-5 kg: 25-85 g/day, 5-10 kg: 85-145 g/day, 10-20 kg: 145-240 g/day, 20-30 kg: 240-325 g/day, 30-40 kg: 325-405 g/day, 40+ kg: 405+ g/day.
Additives declared on the label
Nutritional additives
Vitamin A 15,000 IU/kg; Vitamin D3 2000 IU/kg; Vitamin E 95 IU/kg; Zinc (Zinc Sulphate Monohydrate) 50 mg/kg; Iron (Iron (II) Sulphate Monohydrate) 50 mg/kg; Manganese (Manganous Sulphate Monohydrate) 35 mg/kg; Iodine (Calcium Iodate Anhydrous) 1 mg/kg
Ingredients (10)17% of the recipe is estimated
Estimated composition
- meat 50.0%
- carb 28.2%
- veg 12.6%
- supplement 5.4%
- fibre 3.8%
| # | As declared | Matched | Label reading | Declared % | Est. % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Dried Salmon (12%) | Salmon | meat · good | 12 | 12.0 |
| 2 | Salmon Stock (2%) | Salmon | meat · good | 2 | 2.0 |
| 3 | Sweet Potato (24%) | Sweet Potatoes | carb · good | 24 | 24.0 |
| 4 | Peas (9%) | Peas | veg · good | 9 | 9.0 |
| 5 | Potato | Potatoes | carb · medium | - | 13.2 |
| 6 | Beet Pulp | Beet Pulp | fibre · medium | - | 11.9 |
| 7 | Linseed | Linseed | veg · good | - | 10.5 |
| 8 | Omega 3 Supplement | Omega-3 Supplement | supplement · good | - | 9.2 |
| 9 | Minerals | Vitamins and minerals | supplement · medium | - | 7.9 |
| 10 | Asparagus (0.3%) | Asparagus | veg · good | 0.3 | 0.3 |
- 1. Dried Salmon (12%)12% declared12.0% estimated
- 2. Salmon Stock (2%)2% declared2.0% estimated
- 3. Sweet Potato (24%)24% declared24.0% estimated
- 4. Peas (9%)9% declared9.0% estimated
- 5. Potato13.2% estimated
- 6. Beet Pulp11.9% estimated
- 7. Linseed10.5% estimated
- 8. Omega 3 Supplement9.2% estimated
- 9. Minerals7.9% estimated
- 10. Asparagus (0.3%)0.3% declared0.3% estimated
Trust and sourceNo recalls recorded in our database · checked 2026-10-07
Brand and contact: Vale Raw
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
- www.valepetfoods.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.
89 reviews on this product · 4.9/5
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 is 71 out of 100. The overall quality of the ingredient list contributed +8.3 points, and the meat content added +5 points. Being labelled nutritionally complete added +2.3 points. However, the processing format reduced the score by -6.7 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 | 0.9 | 9.191 | +8.32 |
| Meat share of dry matter | 51.8% | 0.096 | +4.97 |
| Carb share of dry matter | 17.1% | -0.115 | -1.97 |
| Vegetable share of dry matter | 10.7% | -0.005 | -0.06 |
| Supplement share of dry matter | 12.1% | -0.012 | -0.15 |
| Undeclared quantities | 16.7% | -0.106 | -1.76 |
| Complete diet | yes | 2.294 | +2.29 |
| High meat (30%+ of dry matter) | yes | 0.707 | +0.71 |
| 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 | 0.9 | 9.191 | +8.32 |
| Meat share of dry matter | 51.8% | 0.096 | +4.97 |
| Carb share of dry matter | 17.1% | -0.115 | -1.97 |
| Oil share of dry matter | 0.0% | -0.092 | +0.00 |
| Vegetable share of dry matter | 10.7% | -0.005 | -0.06 |
| Additive share of dry matter | 0.0% | 0.163 | +0.00 |
| Supplement share of dry matter | 12.1% | -0.012 | -0.15 |
| 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 | 16.7% | -0.106 | -1.76 |
| 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 | 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
- +1 transparency bonus
- Subtotal
- 70.7
- Final score
- 71/100
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 | 26 | 28.3 (band 18 to 40%) | 98 |
| Fat | 12 | 13 (band 5.5 to 20%) | 100 |
| Fibre | 3.5 | 3.8 (band 0.5 to 5%) | 100 |
| Calcium | 1.1 | 1.2 (band 0.5 to 2.5%) | 90.9 |
| Phosphorus | 1 | 1.1 (band 0.4 to 1.6%) | 100 |
| Calcium:phosphorus ratio | 1.1 | 1.1 (band 1 to 2%) | 76 |
| Omega fatty acids (omega-6 and omega-3) | - | - | 63.4 |
Omega fatty acids (omega-6 and omega-3): scored as the mean of its declared components (omega-6 63.4). The FEDIAF minimum for omega-6 is linoleic acid specifically.
Scored over 7 declared nutrients (combined weight 90); undeclared nutrients do not affect the score.
Declared fortification: 7 nutritional additives on the label
- Vitamin A 15,000 IU/kg
- Vitamin D3 2000 IU/kg
- Vitamin E 95 IU/kg
- Zinc (Zinc Sulphate Monohydrate) 50 mg/kg
- Iron (Iron (II) Sulphate Monohydrate) 50 mg/kg
- Manganese (Manganous Sulphate Monohydrate) 35 mg/kg
- Iodine (Calcium Iodate Anhydrous) 1 mg/kg
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 (83.3% of the recipe mass) (voluntary) | 16.7/20 |
| Analytical constituents declared (mandatory) | 15/15 |
| Additives declared (mandatory) | 5/10 |
| 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 |
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.
80/100 · limited — 5 checkable claims: 4 consistent, 1 contradicted.
Contradicted by the label
- "28% Protein Content" — the declared label says otherwise on high protein.
Consistent with the label
- "Complete & Grain-Free" — supported by the declared complete and balanced data.
- "Single-Source Protein" — supported by the declared single protein data.
- "British Sourced" — supported by the declared made in the UK data.
- "Made in Britain" — supported by the declared made in the UK data.
6 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Grain-Free (on page) | Content | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Complete & Grain-Free (on page) | Content | consistent | Manufacturer assertion |
| Single-Source Protein (on page) | Content | consistent | Manufacturer assertion |
| Human-Grade Meat (on page) | Content | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| British Sourced (on page) | Content | consistent | Manufacturer assertion |
| Made in Britain (on page) | Content | consistent | Manufacturer assertion |
| 0 Artificial Additives (on page) | Free-from | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| 28% Protein Content (on page) | High/low level | contradicted | Manufacturer assertion |
| 50%+ Fresh Meat Content (on page) | Content | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Natural Probiotic Included (on page) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Built-In Gut Support Every batch includes a natural probiotic, sweet potato for slow-release energy, and Scottish salmon oil for skin, coat, and joint health. (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 Succulent Salmon
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.