Our verdict
Is Winner Senior Lite Dog Food a good dog food?
We score it 47/100 (Average). This reflects the ingredient quality, composition and label transparency of the recipe as declared on the label.
Complete extruded dry food for senior dogs, with maize, dried chicken protein and meat meal as the main ingredients.
Only part of the analytical constituents are declared, so the nutritional picture is incomplete.
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 senior dogs
- Doesn't list lamb, fish, venison, pork, duck as ingredients
Consider something else if:
- Your dog avoids chicken: the label lists dried chicken protein
- Your dog avoids beef: it is listed as an ingredient
- Your dog avoids turkey: the label lists poultry fat
- Your dog avoids grain: the label lists maize / corn
- You want a single-protein recipe: this one lists more than one animal protein
- You need more protein than this: 19.0% on a dry-matter basis is in the low 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 19% · Fat 7.50%
Typical analysis (as fed)
| Nutrient | As fed |
|---|---|
| Protein | 19% |
| Fat | 7.50% |
| Fibre | 2.40% |
| Ash | 7% |
Additives & feeding info
Feeding and storage
Feeding guide
Body weight: 1-5kg 30-100g; 5-10kg 100-160g; 10-15kg 160-220g; 15-20kg 220-265g; 20-25kg 265-310g; 25-30kg 310-350g; 30-35kg 350-415g; 35-40kg 415-465g; 40-45kg 465-500g; 45-50kg 500-540g; 50-55kg 540-580g; 55-60kg 580-620g daily.
Additives declared on the label
Nutritional additives
Vitamin A 9,500 IU/kg; Vitamin D3 2,000 IU/kg; Alpha Tocopherol Acetate (Vitamin E) 50 IU/kg; Copper (Copper Sulphate) 15 mg/kg; Selenium (Sodium Selenite) 0.1 mg/kg; Iron (Iron Sulphate) 100 mg/kg; Manganese (Manganese Oxide) 40 mg/kg; Zinc (Zinc Oxide) 100 mg/kg; Iodine (Calcium Iodate) 1.5 mg/kg; L-Lysine 800 mg/kg
Technological additives
Antioxidants; Preservatives
Ingredients (11)100% of the recipe is estimated
Estimated composition
- meat 29.4%
- carb 21.9%
- fibre 15.0%
- oil 9.6%
- veg 9.1%
- supplement 8.0%
- additive 7.0%
| # | As declared | Matched | Label reading | Declared % | Est. % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Maize | Maize / Corn | carb · medium | - | 11.8 |
| 2 | Dehydrated Chicken | Dried chicken protein | meat · good | - | 11.2 |
| 3 | Dehydrated Beef | Meat Meal | meat · medium | - | 10.7 |
| 4 | Dehulled Oats | Oats | carb · medium | - | 10.2 |
| 5 | Poultry Fat | Poultry Fat | oil · medium | - | 9.6 |
| 6 | Whole Linseed | Linseed | veg · good | - | 9.1 |
| 7 | Beet Pulp | Beet Pulp | fibre · medium | - | 8.6 |
| 8 | Minerals | Vitamins and minerals | supplement · medium | - | 8.0 |
| 9 | Chicken Digest | Digest | meat · poor | - | 7.5 |
| 10 | Yeast Extract | Hydrolysed Yeast | additive · medium | - | 7.0 |
| 11 | Chicory Extract. | Chicory Root Extract | fibre · good | - | 6.4 |
- 1. Maize11.8% estimated
- 2. Dehydrated Chicken11.2% estimated
- 3. Dehydrated Beef10.7% estimated
- 4. Dehulled Oats10.2% estimated
- 5. Poultry Fat9.6% estimated
- 6. Whole Linseed9.1% estimated
- 7. Beet Pulp8.6% estimated
- 8. Minerals8.0% estimated
- 9. Chicken Digest7.5% estimated
- 10. Yeast Extract7.0% estimated
- 11. Chicory Extract.6.4% estimated
Trust and sourceNo recalls recorded in our database · checked 2026-09-14
Brand and contact: Winner
- [email protected]
- Phone
- +1234567890
- Address
- 1, My Address, My Street, New York City, NY, USA
- Contact page
- www.winnerplus.eu
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
- redmillsstore.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.
Trustpilot: 4.8/5 · 121 reviews
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 47 out of 100 based on several key factors. The overall quality of the ingredient list added +5.3 points. However, ingredients without printed percentages reduced the score by -10.6. Additionally, the processing format deducted -6.7 and the carbohydrate content contributed -2.6.
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 | +5.33 |
| Carb share of dry matter | 22.3% | -0.115 | -2.57 |
| Oil share of dry matter | 11.0% | -0.092 | -1.02 |
| Vegetable share of dry matter | 9.5% | -0.005 | -0.05 |
| Additive share of dry matter | 7.2% | 0.163 | +1.18 |
| Supplement share of dry matter | 8.5% | -0.012 | -0.10 |
| Recipe graded poor | 7.5% | -0.065 | -0.49 |
| Poor-quality meat in recipe | 7.5% | -0.179 | -1.34 |
| Number of poor ingredients | 1 | -0.876 | -0.88 |
| Largest single poor ingredient | 7.5% | 0.060 | +0.45 |
| 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 | -8.34 | 0.222 | -1.85 |
| 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 | 0.6 | 9.191 | +5.33 |
| Meat share of dry matter | 0.0% | 0.096 | +0.00 |
| Carb share of dry matter | 22.3% | -0.115 | -2.57 |
| Oil share of dry matter | 11.0% | -0.092 | -1.02 |
| Vegetable share of dry matter | 9.5% | -0.005 | -0.05 |
| Additive share of dry matter | 7.2% | 0.163 | +1.18 |
| Supplement share of dry matter | 8.5% | -0.012 | -0.10 |
| 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 | 7.5% | -0.065 | -0.49 |
| Poor-quality meat in recipe | 7.5% | -0.179 | -1.34 |
| Number of poor ingredients | 1 | -0.876 | -0.88 |
| Largest single poor ingredient | 7.5% | 0.060 | +0.45 |
| 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 | -8.34 | 0.222 | -1.85 |
| 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
- 46.6
- Final score
- 47/100
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 | 19 | 21 (band 18 to 40%) | 78.2 |
| Fat | 7.5 | 8.3 (band 5.5 to 20%) | 81.5 |
| Fibre | 2.4 | 2.7 (band 0.5 to 5%) | 98.7 |
Scored over 3 declared nutrients (combined weight 50); undeclared nutrients do not affect the score. Moisture was not declared and was estimated at 9.5% from the food type.
Declared fortification: 10 nutritional additives on the label
- Vitamin A 9,500 IU/kg
- Vitamin D3 2,000 IU/kg
- Alpha Tocopherol Acetate (Vitamin E) 50 IU/kg
- Copper (Copper Sulphate) 15 mg/kg
- Selenium (Sodium Selenite) 0.1 mg/kg
- Iron (Iron Sulphate) 100 mg/kg
- Manganese (Manganese Oxide) 40 mg/kg
- Zinc (Zinc Oxide) 100 mg/kg
- Iodine (Calcium Iodate) 1.5 mg/kg
- L-Lysine 800 mg/kg
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 (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) | 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, 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.
100/100 · moderate — 2 checkable claims: 2 consistent, 0 contradicted.
Consistent with the label
- "Complete dog food with 22% meat" — supported by the declared complete and balanced data.
- "Low fat, and lower protein (19%)" — supported by the declared low protein data.
2 further claims on file that we cannot check against the label.
Moderate: every checkable claim is consistent with the declared label.
| Claim | Type | Check | Substantiation |
|---|---|---|---|
| No artificial colours or flavours (on pack) | Free-from | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Complete dog food with 22% meat (on pack) | Content | consistent | Manufacturer assertion |
| Omegas 3 & 6 for healthy skin and coat (on pack) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Low fat, and lower protein (19%) (on pack) | High/low level | consistent | Manufacturer assertion |
The full scoring method is published. See the methodology for exactly how the headline score and each dimension are calculated.
Alternatives to Senior Lite 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.