Walker and Drake Chicken Cold Pressed Working Dog Food
Dry Cold Pressed · completeHigh meatClear label
Our verdict
Is Walker and Drake Chicken Cold Pressed Working Dog Food a good dog food?
We score it 65/100 (Average). This reflects the ingredient quality, composition and label transparency of the recipe as declared on the label.
Complete cold-pressed dry food for adult dogs, with dried chicken protein, rice and sweet potatoes as the main ingredients.
Only part of the analytical constituents are declared, so the nutritional picture is incomplete.
33% 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, lamb, fish, venison, pork, duck as ingredients
Consider something else if:
- Your dog avoids chicken: the label lists dried chicken protein
- Your dog avoids turkey: the label lists poultry fat
- Your dog avoids grain: the label lists rice - white
- 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 33% · Fat 7%
Typical analysis (as fed)
| Nutrient | As fed |
|---|---|
| Protein | 33% |
| Fat | 7% |
| Fibre | 2% |
| Ash | 10% |
Additives & feeding info
Additives declared on the label
Nutritional additives
Vitamin A 15000 IU; Vitamin D3 2000 IU; Vitamin E 50 IU; Vitamin B1 (Thiamine) 3 mg; Vitamin B2 (Riboflavin) 8 mg; Vitamin B6 5 mg; Vitamin B12 40 mcg; Vitamin C 50 mg; Vitamin K 2 mg; Zinc 100 mg; Manganese 80 mg; Copper 20 mg; Iron 30 mg
Ingredients (9)33% of the recipe is estimated
Estimated composition
- meat 41.0%
- carb 37.6%
- veg 11.6%
- supplement 5.1%
- oil 4.7%
| # | As declared | Matched | Label reading | Declared % | Est. % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Dried Chicken 41% | Dried chicken protein | meat · good | 41 | 41.0 |
| 2 | Pre Gelatinised Rice 26% | Rice - white | carb · medium | 26 | 26.0 |
| 3 | Sweet Potato | Sweet Potatoes | carb · good | - | 6.0 |
| 4 | Flaked Potato | Potatoes | carb · medium | - | 5.6 |
| 5 | Brewers Yeast | Brewer's Yeast | supplement · good | - | 5.1 |
| 6 | Poultry Fat | Poultry Fat | oil · medium | - | 4.7 |
| 7 | Apple | Apples | veg · good | - | 4.3 |
| 8 | Carrot | Carrots | veg · good | - | 3.9 |
| 9 | Tomato | Tomato | veg · good | - | 3.4 |
- 1. Dried Chicken 41%41% declared41.0% estimated
- 2. Pre Gelatinised Rice 26%26% declared26.0% estimated
- 3. Sweet Potato6.0% estimated
- 4. Flaked Potato5.6% estimated
- 5. Brewers Yeast5.1% estimated
- 6. Poultry Fat4.7% estimated
- 7. Apple4.3% estimated
- 8. Carrot3.9% estimated
- 9. Tomato3.4% estimated
Trust and sourceNo recalls recorded in our database · checked 2026-08-22
Brand and contact: Walker and Drake
- [email protected]
- Phone
- 01226 661104
- Address
- Unit 15, Darton Business Park, Barnsley, S75 5QX
Trust and provenance
- Recall history
- No recalls recorded in our database
- Label data last checked
- 2026-08-22
- Scored with
- Model v3 (methodology)
- Product page
- www.walkeranddrake.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?
The overall score is 65 out of 100. The processing format contributed -6.7 points, which pulled the score down. The overall quality of the ingredient list contributed +6.5 points, and the meat content contributed +4.9 points, both improving the result. The carbohydrate content contributed -4 points, reducing the total once again.
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 | 0.7 | 9.191 | +6.48 |
| Meat share of dry matter | 50.5% | 0.096 | +4.85 |
| Carb share of dry matter | 34.5% | -0.115 | -3.97 |
| Oil share of dry matter | 6.3% | -0.092 | -0.58 |
| Vegetable share of dry matter | 2.3% | -0.005 | -0.01 |
| Supplement share of dry matter | 6.3% | -0.012 | -0.08 |
| Undeclared quantities | 33.0% | -0.106 | -3.48 |
| 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: Dry Cold Pressed | yes | -6.713 | -6.71 |
Show all 40 components
| Component | Input | Coefficient | Contribution |
|---|---|---|---|
| Base score | - | 30.909 | +30.91 |
| Average ingredient quality | 0.7 | 9.191 | +6.48 |
| Meat share of dry matter | 50.5% | 0.096 | +4.85 |
| Carb share of dry matter | 34.5% | -0.115 | -3.97 |
| Oil share of dry matter | 6.3% | -0.092 | -0.58 |
| Vegetable share of dry matter | 2.3% | -0.005 | -0.01 |
| Additive share of dry matter | 0.0% | 0.163 | +0.00 |
| Supplement share of dry matter | 6.3% | -0.012 | -0.08 |
| 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 | 33.0% | -0.106 | -3.48 |
| 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 | yes | -6.713 | -6.71 |
| 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
- +0.02
- Additives declared on label
- +1 transparency bonus
- Subtotal
- 65.2
- Final score
- 65/100
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 | 33 | 36 (band 18 to 40%) | 100 |
| Fat | 7 | 7.6 (band 5.5 to 20%) | 78.8 |
| Fibre | 2 | 2.2 (band 0.5 to 5%) | 92.4 |
Scored over 3 declared nutrients (combined weight 50); undeclared nutrients do not affect the score. Moisture was not declared and was estimated at 8.3% from the food type.
Declared fortification: 13 nutritional additives on the label
- Vitamin A 15000 IU
- Vitamin D3 2000 IU
- Vitamin E 50 IU
- Vitamin B1 (Thiamine) 3 mg
- Vitamin B2 (Riboflavin) 8 mg
- Vitamin B6 5 mg
- Vitamin B12 40 mcg
- Vitamin C 50 mg
- Vitamin K 2 mg
- Zinc 100 mg
- Manganese 80 mg
- Copper 20 mg
- Iron 30 mg
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 (67% of the recipe mass) (voluntary) | 13.4/20 |
| Analytical constituents declared (mandatory) - not on file | 0/15 |
| Additives declared (mandatory) | 5/10 |
| Energy value declared (voluntary) - not on file | 0/5 |
| Complete/complementary designation (mandatory) | 5/5 |
| Feeding guidance given (mandatory) - not on file | 0/10 |
| Manufacturer identity and address (mandatory) | 10/10 |
| 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, Feeding guidance given, 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.
33/100 · limited — 3 checkable claims: 1 consistent, 2 contradicted.
Contradicted by the label
- "Formulated without wheat, maize or barley" — the declared label says otherwise on grain-free.
- "Gluten free" — the declared label says otherwise on grain-free.
Consistent with the label
- "Packed with high levels of lean protein to support strength, stamina and muscle recovery" — supported by the declared high protein data.
7 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| gentle on digestion - breaking down easily without swelling like traditional kibble (on page) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| balanced with healthy carbohydrates for sustained energy (on page) | Content | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Packed with high levels of lean protein to support strength, stamina and muscle recovery (on page) | High/low level | consistent | Manufacturer assertion |
| Formulated without wheat, maize or barley (on page) | Free-from | contradicted | Manufacturer assertion |
| No additives (on page) | Free-from | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Low sugar (on page) | High/low level | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Gluten free (on page) | Free-from | contradicted | Manufacturer assertion |
| No artificial flavouring (on page) | Free-from | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Probiotic (on page) | Content | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Natural Ingredients (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 Chicken Cold Pressed Working 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.